SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (41679)10/22/2008 5:49:08 PM
From: Elroy Jetson1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217847
 
If you increase taxes on those with a low propensity to spend, and decrease taxes on those with a higher propensity to spend, you end up with an increase in GDP.

Your proposed policy of eliminating jobs to subsidize the income tax rate of wealthy people is so bizarre as not merit a comment.

It most closely resembles Ronald Reagan's equally bizarre scheme to create prosperity by leveraging-up the government, business and consumers.

We are currently experiencing the inevitable collapse of Reagan's plan. Enjoy it.
.



To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (41679)10/23/2008 9:35:45 AM
From: Follies  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217847
 
So, tell me, how does firing people to pay for a tax increase create jobs? Kindly explain, keep it pithy and to the point, this means don't give me any more rehashed talking points, just a direct answer would be nice... TIA

There is an answer so I will have to answer for Elroy.

He just doesnt believe that you and others will actual fire people but instead you will take a smaller profit or even run your business at a loss because you believe things will get better.

But then when unemployment does shoot up, he will say its not the fault of the policy, the intention of the policy was to help employment and the intentions are far more important than outcomes.

Does that answer your question GZ?