Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Rand Freaking Paul
Author Message
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #41
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 09:33 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do we pay down on the interest or is that being compounded too?
And JMU Puuhhhhleaze. Yes you can’t ***** and moan about 9 trillion and thn add 1.5 trillion in a tax cut. If you cut one tax you have to find another area to balance out revenue. Factor in unfounded liabilities. I listened Jim Drunkenmiller on our unfounded liabilities. No one is serious about it. For your comparison between Obama’s stimulus. That was deficit spending to get us out of a contraction. A pretty severe one. Here, not so much. This looks like a campaign favor.

So why did the deficit spending not stop when the contraction stopped? The left makes two contradictory claims:

1) That Obama ended the Great Recession
2) That the Obama defects were necessary because we were in a recession

They can't both be true.
(This post was last modified: 02-10-2018 09:49 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
02-10-2018 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #42
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-09-2018 10:47 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  We do all the research and design on miniaturized warheads, the Chinese end up with them.
We do all the research and design on the F-22 then cancel production. Then the Chinese do a dupe.
We develop machines to create super-silent submarine propellers and then let the Russians get hold of the blueprints.
We develop drone technology and the frickin' Iranians hijack it and convince it to land at their airport.
We are developing their stuff for them at taxpayer expense while our politicians are spying on each other.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

When you have more people working in the Pentagon than it took to win WWII, secrets are gong to get out. It's a Washington thing. Lean and mean is the only way to keep secrets.

And there are a couple of significant differences about those copies:
1) They don't have the materials science technology that we do, so a lot of things that we do with exotic materials, they copy with cast iron. That means they don't perform as well, but are probably more rugged.
2) Their maintenance personnel are generally less skilled that ours. That means that their equipment has more down time. But they consider that in design so they make stuff easier to maintain. That makes a lot of their stuff more attractive to third world countries, so they export a lot to those places and in the process they build relationships with them.

I've seen it described as high tech versus heavy metal, and that fits.
02-10-2018 09:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUDunk Offline
Rootin' fer Dukes, bud
*

Posts: 17,222
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 717
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Shmocation
Post: #43
Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 09:47 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Hypocrisy isn't measured on a scale.


Perhaps not. But one of the above has at least the potential for a positive net outcome, one has been shown to be a spectacular failure.

Tax cuts work. History has proven that. Profligate spending does the exact opposite.

I’ll take my chances with the former.
02-10-2018 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Dominion Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,362
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Almost six feet deep
Post: #44
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 10:08 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:47 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Hypocrisy isn't measured on a scale.


Perhaps not. But one of the above has at least the potential for a positive net outcome, one has been shown to be a spectacular failure.

Tax cuts work. History has proven that. Profligate spending does the exact opposite.

I’ll take my chances with the former.

Tax cuts work? for some maybe. Trickle down has proven to be a mirage time and time again. tax cuts coupled with irresponsible spending increases is a recipe for disaster.
02-10-2018 10:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,694
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 133
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 09:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:33 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do we pay down on the interest or is that being compounded too?
And JMU Puuhhhhleaze. Yes you can’t ***** and moan about 9 trillion and thn add 1.5 trillion in a tax cut. If you cut one tax you have to find another area to balance out revenue. Factor in unfounded liabilities. I listened Jim Drunkenmiller on our unfounded liabilities. No one is serious about it. For your comparison between Obama’s stimulus. That was deficit spending to get us out of a contraction. A pretty severe one. Here, not so much. This looks like a campaign favor.

So why did the deficit spending not stop when the contraction stopped? The left makes two contradictory claims:

1) That Obama ended the Great Recession
2) That the Obama defects were necessary because we were in a recession

They can't both be true.


The idea of Obamacare was that the price of healthcare would go down by years. It would have cut the spending on Medicaid and Medicare budget down. But, we had some states refused to accept the law of the land, and states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri and Kansas that accepted Obamacare had a rush of patients crossing the border for healthcare. Texarkana, Arkansas doctors were getting a lot of Texarkana, Texas patients who wanted a cheaper price on their doctor's visits. As it is, the Obamacare in Arkansas is stable, cheaper healthcare costs, and prices of insurance is much cheaper than Texas. Cancer patients from Texas that are on Blue Cross/Blue Shields wound up keeping their insurance because they went to Arkansas for their treatment. We are short of doctors and nurses in this state as it is.
02-10-2018 10:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #46
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 10:31 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:33 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do we pay down on the interest or is that being compounded too?
And JMU Puuhhhhleaze. Yes you can’t ***** and moan about 9 trillion and thn add 1.5 trillion in a tax cut. If you cut one tax you have to find another area to balance out revenue. Factor in unfounded liabilities. I listened Jim Drunkenmiller on our unfounded liabilities. No one is serious about it. For your comparison between Obama’s stimulus. That was deficit spending to get us out of a contraction. A pretty severe one. Here, not so much. This looks like a campaign favor.
So why did the deficit spending not stop when the contraction stopped? The left makes two contradictory claims:
1) That Obama ended the Great Recession
2) That the Obama defects were necessary because we were in a recession
They can't both be true.
The idea of Obamacare was that the price of healthcare would go down by years. It would have cut the spending on Medicaid and Medicare budget down. But, we had some states refused to accept the law of the land, and states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri and Kansas that accepted Obamacare had a rush of patients crossing the border for healthcare. Texarkana, Arkansas doctors were getting a lot of Texarkana, Texas patients who wanted a cheaper price on their doctor's visits. As it is, the Obamacare in Arkansas is stable, cheaper healthcare costs, and prices of insurance is much cheaper than Texas. Cancer patients from Texas that are on Blue Cross/Blue Shields wound up keeping their insurance because they went to Arkansas for their treatment. We are short of doctors and nurses in this state as it is.

Number one, the deficits were a lot bigger than anything that can be attributed to Obamacare or Medicaid or Medicare. Remember, Obamacare was going to reduce the deficit.

Number two, the idea of Obamacare is that health care costs would go down because docs would be willing to do more work for less money. Guess what? They're not.
02-10-2018 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Dominion Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,362
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Almost six feet deep
Post: #47
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 10:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 10:31 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:33 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do we pay down on the interest or is that being compounded too?
And JMU Puuhhhhleaze. Yes you can’t ***** and moan about 9 trillion and thn add 1.5 trillion in a tax cut. If you cut one tax you have to find another area to balance out revenue. Factor in unfounded liabilities. I listened Jim Drunkenmiller on our unfounded liabilities. No one is serious about it. For your comparison between Obama’s stimulus. That was deficit spending to get us out of a contraction. A pretty severe one. Here, not so much. This looks like a campaign favor.
So why did the deficit spending not stop when the contraction stopped? The left makes two contradictory claims:
1) That Obama ended the Great Recession
2) That the Obama defects were necessary because we were in a recession
They can't both be true.
The idea of Obamacare was that the price of healthcare would go down by years. It would have cut the spending on Medicaid and Medicare budget down. But, we had some states refused to accept the law of the land, and states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri and Kansas that accepted Obamacare had a rush of patients crossing the border for healthcare. Texarkana, Arkansas doctors were getting a lot of Texarkana, Texas patients who wanted a cheaper price on their doctor's visits. As it is, the Obamacare in Arkansas is stable, cheaper healthcare costs, and prices of insurance is much cheaper than Texas. Cancer patients from Texas that are on Blue Cross/Blue Shields wound up keeping their insurance because they went to Arkansas for their treatment. We are short of doctors and nurses in this state as it is.

Number one, the deficits were a lot bigger than anything that can be attributed to Obamacare or Medicaid or Medicare. Remember, Obamacare was going to reduce the deficit.

Number two, the idea of Obamacare is that health care costs would go down because docs would be willing to do more work for less money. Guess what? They're not.

You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.
02-10-2018 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ark30inf Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,643
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 588
I Root For: Arkansas State
Location:
Post: #48
Rand Freaking Paul
Part of the medical problem is the idea that I should have the same healthcare that Bill Gates does. If Bill Gates can get access to a cybernetic replacement gonad that costs 40 bazillion dollars then I should get that too. If Bill Gates can spend a million to keep his 120 year old comatose grandma alive for 2 extra days then my grandma should live 2 more days too. Healthcare should be a human right free to everybody they say.

Yeah, that don't work.

Instead of all that, how about starting with something simple like....how do we make insulin cheap and affordable? Lower demand and increase supply. Just that one thing would make a lot of people better off.

And if you do want to give healthcare as charity....then give actual healthcare. Not 100,000 new IRS agents, not vouchers, not new govt. Departments, not fines and fees, not tax deferments, not free insurance policies, not websites...actual healthcare.




Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
02-10-2018 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #49
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.

No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.

Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.
02-10-2018 11:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUDunk Offline
Rootin' fer Dukes, bud
*

Posts: 17,222
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 717
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Shmocation
Post: #50
Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 10:26 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 10:08 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 09:47 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Hypocrisy isn't measured on a scale.


Perhaps not. But one of the above has at least the potential for a positive net outcome, one has been shown to be a spectacular failure.

Tax cuts work. History has proven that. Profligate spending does the exact opposite.

I’ll take my chances with the former.

Tax cuts work? for some maybe. Trickle down has proven to be a mirage time and time again. tax cuts coupled with irresponsible spending increases is a recipe for disaster.


And, yet again, for the uneducated, there is nothing known as “trickle down”.

Made up term by the socialist left in the early 80’s to try and demean any school of economic thought not Keynesian, that allows those actually earning their money to KEEP their money.

“For some”, in this instance it appears to be around “working” for somewhere near 90% of taxpayers.

You don’t pay taxes? You ain getting a tax cut. Get a job. Contribute. Then we’ll talk.
02-10-2018 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Dominion Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,362
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Almost six feet deep
Post: #51
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 11:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.

No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.

Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.

I understood you to say welfare did not work because it did not provide an income floor high enough to actually give a person a sufficient reason to get a job. Did I misunderstand?
02-10-2018 12:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #52
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 12:05 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.
No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.
Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.
I understood you to say welfare did not work because it did not provide an income floor high enough to actually give a person a sufficient reason to get a job. Did I misunderstand?

Yep.
02-10-2018 12:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Dominion Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,362
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Almost six feet deep
Post: #53
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 12:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 12:05 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.
No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.
Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.
I understood you to say welfare did not work because it did not provide an income floor high enough to actually give a person a sufficient reason to get a job. Did I misunderstand?

Yep.

Well then explain.
02-10-2018 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #54
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 12:19 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 12:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 12:05 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I understood you to say welfare did not work because it did not provide an income floor high enough to actually give a person a sufficient reason to get a job. Did I misunderstand?
Yep.
Well then explain.

I'm sorely tempted to say go back and read what I wrote, but I'll try again.

The basic problem is that instead of having a one comprehensive welfare safety net, we have hundreds of specifically focused and means tested programs. This leads to four basic problems:

1) Administration requires an army of gate keeper bureaucrats to make sure that only people who meet specific criteria receive benefits. For many programs, the cost of administration rivals or excess the amounts of benefits paid. There are numerous studies of this.

2) Many people with genuine needs fall through the cracks because they don't quite meet the exact criteria. These are the people who get left behind.

3) On the other hand, many people learn to manipulate the system by making sure that they just manage to fall inside the criteria for this program and that program and that other one over there. These are people who may not have real needs but they can do better working the system than getting a job. This is the welfare Cadillac group.

4) Means testing (which is largely a republican thing, or a concession republicans to get their votes) means tat as you start earning income, your welfare benefits go away. The combination of lost benefits plus taxes on earnings means that there is some range where you lose a dollar to the government for every dollar you earn. This varies a bit by state, but there are multiple studies suggesting that for a family of three you take home roughly the same amount of cash at the end of the day if your earned income is anywhere in the range from $15,000 (which most would describe as poverty) to $55,000 (which most would describe as middle class). This so-called poverty trap is a huge disincentive to working your way up the ladder.

What I'm saying is this. Do a guaranteed minimum income at the subsistence level, coupled with Bismarck health care. Everybody gets it, from the homeless person on the street to Bill and Melinda Gates, so you don't need the vast gatekeeper bureaucracy and you don't have the people who slip through the cracks and get nothing. You pay out almost all program costs in benefits instead of administration, and you don't make the payments so large that they will either 1) break you or 2) provide for a sufficient level of comfort as to disincentive work. It will keep you alive, and that plus a full time minimum wage at the current minimum wage will put you above the poverty line, but it never goes away as you've up the ladder so the disincentive to work is gone.

Bottom line, what I'm saying is almost exactly the opposite of how you characterized it. Set the income floor high enough to support subsistence but low enough that getting a job is highly incentivized. People who work should live better than people who don't work.
(This post was last modified: 02-10-2018 12:44 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
02-10-2018 12:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Dominion Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,362
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Almost six feet deep
Post: #55
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
I think I characterized it correctly.

"Set the income floor high enough to support subsistence but low enough that getting a job is highly incentivized." Seems you also tied in some form of health care and tax incentives. If dems could do this, they would. Repubs would blow a gasket. You may be more, shall I say, progressive than you think. God Forbid!
02-10-2018 01:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 56,420
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1150
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #56
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 01:10 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I think I characterized it correctly.
"Set the income floor high enough to support subsistence but low enough that getting a job is highly incentivized." Seems you also tied in some form of health care and tax incentives. If dems could do this, they would. Repubs would blow a gasket. You may be more, shall I say, progressive than you think. God Forbid!

Nope, you are misunderstanding something. The democrats would want to set such an income at $20,000-$30,000 or more, plus single payer health care, which would disincentivize working for many. Plus at that level either you have to make it go away at some point, thus having "poverty trap" impacts, or we can't afford it as a society and economy. This concept is more around $8,000 or so plus Bismarck health care, so getting a job is still attractive.

Actually this--in the form of the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund--is part of the Fair Tax proposal that is almost exclusively a libertarian/republican concept. And it essentially revives the negative income tax proposal by Milton Friedman, who is also associated with classical liberal (libertarian) principles. I have not heard or read of a single democrat championing it, although I'm sure that among millions there may be one somewhere.
02-10-2018 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Online
laughing at MSM meltdown
*

Posts: 38,507
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 1799
I Root For: StL Cards & USM
Location: who knows?
Post: #57
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 11:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.

No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.

Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.

I'll simply say this.....my BIL who is an ENT was up in arms when ZEROcare was unleashed.....

he's now roses and then some.....

subsidized volume is a wonderful thingy for some.....

it's simply now a matter of 'how much' does he want to make......

fk'n liberal morons.....they don't have a fk'n clue about cause/effect.....
02-10-2018 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoMs Eagle Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,239
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Mighty Mustard
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 01:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 01:10 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I think I characterized it correctly.
"Set the income floor high enough to support subsistence but low enough that getting a job is highly incentivized." Seems you also tied in some form of health care and tax incentives. If dems could do this, they would. Repubs would blow a gasket. You may be more, shall I say, progressive than you think. God Forbid!

Nope, you are misunderstanding something. The democrats would want to set such an income at $20,000-$30,000 or more, plus single payer health care, which would disincentivize working for many. Plus at that level either you have to make it go away at some point, thus having "poverty trap" impacts, or we can't afford it as a society and economy. This concept is more around $8,000 or so plus Bismarck health care, so getting a job is still attractive.

Actually this--in the form of the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund--is part of the Fair Tax proposal that is almost exclusively a libertarian/republican concept. And it essentially revives the negative income tax proposal by Milton Friedman, who is also associated with classical liberal (libertarian) principles. I have not heard or read of a single democrat championing it, although I'm sure that among millions there may be one somewhere.

This is from Politico. Hardly a conservative rag. Read it and understand this. They don’t dispute it they just say it’s wrong because the recipient doesn’t get cash to spend as they wish. $20.83/hour ain’t bad for waiting around talking on your obama phone till the check comes in.

http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/s...-2083-hou/
02-10-2018 02:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ark30inf Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,643
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 588
I Root For: Arkansas State
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 11:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 11:02 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  You have pointed out in other threads that many liberal policies fail because they don't go far enough. Obama care is a classic example. It could work much better if not so emasculated by the right.

No, I haven't. Please provide examples where you misunderstood that to be the point that I was making.

Liberal policies fail because they fail to account for reality. Obamacare cannot work because it ignores the basic laws of economics.

You can give everyone $10 million dollars and within a year you'll have poor people and insanely wealthy people. You can divide everything in this country up equally and within a year you'll have an upper class and a lower class.

Utopia ain't coming.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
02-10-2018 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Online
laughing at MSM meltdown
*

Posts: 38,507
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 1799
I Root For: StL Cards & USM
Location: who knows?
Post: #60
RE: Rand Freaking Paul
(02-10-2018 02:17 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 01:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-10-2018 01:10 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I think I characterized it correctly.
"Set the income floor high enough to support subsistence but low enough that getting a job is highly incentivized." Seems you also tied in some form of health care and tax incentives. If dems could do this, they would. Repubs would blow a gasket. You may be more, shall I say, progressive than you think. God Forbid!

Nope, you are misunderstanding something. The democrats would want to set such an income at $20,000-$30,000 or more, plus single payer health care, which would disincentivize working for many. Plus at that level either you have to make it go away at some point, thus having "poverty trap" impacts, or we can't afford it as a society and economy. This concept is more around $8,000 or so plus Bismarck health care, so getting a job is still attractive.

Actually this--in the form of the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund--is part of the Fair Tax proposal that is almost exclusively a libertarian/republican concept. And it essentially revives the negative income tax proposal by Milton Friedman, who is also associated with classical liberal (libertarian) principles. I have not heard or read of a single democrat championing it, although I'm sure that among millions there may be one somewhere.

This is from Politico. Hardly a conservative rag. Read it and understand this. They don’t dispute it they just say it’s wrong because the recipient doesn’t get cash to spend as they wish. $20.83/hour ain’t bad for waiting around talking on your obama phone till the check comes in.

http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/s...-2083-hou/

#incentive......what a novel concept, eh?

I've said it too many times....."once you spoil the chil'ns, it's tough to reacclimate dems"

again, the 'One Minute Manager' should be req'd reading by 4th grade....
02-10-2018 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.