Donald Trump

[minigun]

QUOTE (raumvogel @ Dec 4 2018, 02:44 AM) All kool aid aside,but Delhi and Beijing are always having smog alerts and they signed on to the climate agreement.

I don't think the u.s. has to sign on to any agreement. China and India are probably 50 years behind the u.s. they need the agreement more than we do. Not like we're going to build 500 coal firing power plants just becouse we pulled out of some agreement.

[minigun]

The whole thing in France comes down to boosting household income or boosting climate change. 280,000 took to the street to protest last week. A recent poll showed the people wanted more household income and less climate change. while the politicians want the opposite.

[pkk]

QUOTE (minigun @ Dec 3 2018, 06:42 PM) The whole thing in France comes down to boosting household income or boosting climate change. 280,000 took to the street to protest last week. A recent poll showed the people wanted more household income and less climate change. while the politicians want the opposite.

Please keep in mind that the protest culture is different (more extreme):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kt-5SmzM-wI (Yellow vests movement 2018)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dby5DihWt08 (Taxi drivers 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXa_B3Hl38I (Farmers 2015)

On the other side there are also riot tourists:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED_lc9PIJ9E (Yellow vests movement 2018)

[zombywoof]

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Dec 3 2018, 08:00 AM) not really. gas prices are about the same as under obama.
personally I'd rather pay a little more and have economic pressure for electric cars and more efficient ICE's. cuz money can't stop hurricanes, forest fires, or my precious snow melting.

Feels much higher now tbh for me. Under Obama I was paying maybe $3 a gallon and now it's hitting like $4.25 a gallon.

[Papsmear]

QUOTE (minigun @ Dec 3 2018, 12:42 PM) A recent poll showed the people wanted more household income and less climate change. while the politicians want the opposite.

Of course the politicians want the opposite.
Keep the masses poor, hungry and under the governments' boot heel, by applying too many taxes, has been going on forever.

[zombywoof]

Yeah. And when you have low taxes the world becomes this paragon of economic parity between the classes, which is precisely why 1880s and 1890s US are so widely held as lovely periods in American history by labor groups.

[zombywoof]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 6319035392

TFW you go through an aleph and there's a full HTT run about to enter 3k from your techbase.

[Papsmear]

I'm sure if you were also to look it up there are probably 10s of thousands news publications about governments around the world wasting the tax payer's money.
I have no issue taxing me if you are fiscally responsible.
If the governments could do that then I would bet everyone's' taxes would be a little lower.
You have a problem with that?

[zombywoof]

Does pork exist in government? Obviously. But it's disingenuous to claim that somehow you're going to get rid of government pork by abolishing taxes. You should be angry that the politicians you voted for passed pork on to special interests and demand accountability from them, and if they do not give you a satisfactory answer as to WHY they forked over the pork, vote them out.

But low-tax, low-regulation economies have a human cost and as a construction worker you would be on the front lines for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Ag ... _of_income

Plus, higher taxes on net income strongly encourages reinvestment of revenue. It's not "net income" if you spend it as part of your expenses, i.e. while there are payroll taxes, corporations don't pay income tax on the portion of money that's set aside to pay their employees, because that counts as an operating cost, which comes out of their profit. From https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefin ... e-tax-work:

"Taxable corporate profits are equal to a corporation’s receipts less allowable deductions—including the cost of goods sold, wages and other employee compensation expenses, interest, nonfederal taxes, depreciation, and advertising."

Higher taxes literally create jobs because it's money that the corporation would lose to the government anyways. Corporate taxes are the government's way of saying "I don't care how much money you make so long as you keep it moving in the economy." Furthermore, this isn't just some idea that people has, it's actually backed up by robust evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_cu ... rical_data

It appears that government revenue peaks out at around 70% top nominal bracket (which is not 70% of your earnings, if you want to know how brackets work talk to Thallium). And hey look at this bit of data:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_cu ... x_rate.svg

The way the propagandists get you is by making you "feel" like it's "your" money that you earned "all by yourself." Actually, the money you've made in your career is a result of the fact that you live in a 1st world nation that has carefully developed and maintained a modern infrastructure that supports a highly specialized economy in which "designing steam pipe junctures for buildings" is a) a job, b) a lucrative job, and c) a job you personally could be trained to do. This isn't a dismissal of the hard work you put in for your career, quite the contrary: it's an acknowledgment that you had a unique opportunity and were successful in pursuing that opportunity. Canada couldn't be happier, but some day you're going to retire and die and they would very much like to be able to afford roads so that the next generation of steam-pipe-junction-designers can get to their classes and/or clients, so if you wouldn't mind giving them a reasonable portion of what you've earned that would be great.

The high-tax, high-regulation economy of Canada is why you are wealthy. The data backs this up considerably. Now that you're wealthy you want to take it away for the next generation.

Also, I'm not going to touch "fiscally responsible" with a 10-foot pole because you strike me as the kind of person who considers the Mars probes a waste of money.

[Terran]

interesting read. my only poke about this whole thing is that the peak of the "Laffer curve" seems to be difficult or impossible to predict. QUOTE A hypothetical Laffer curve for any given economy can only be estimated and such estimates are controversial.[/quote]
also, the article is weak on how tax revenue might grow over time despite a short-medium term deficit when reducing taxes, even if you're to the left of the Laffer curve peak. i'll admit macroeconomics is not my forte though.