|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Off to a good start /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1518542212 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 09:16:52 |
|
Title: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 09:16:52 https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/feds-collect-record-taxes-first-month-under-tax-cut-run-surplus The stupid budget will probably sink the effects of the tax cuts |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/13/18 at 09:52:01 5E4147405D5A6B5B6B53414D06340 wrote:
maybe.... a lot of people prepaid taxes under the old tax law to avoid not having the write offs after the new tax law eliminates them. the new tax law hasn't really gone into full effect yet. so there's a lot more going on than just unemployment going down, like it has been for the last 9 years |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/13/18 at 10:26:34 I have not read/seen the budget, so I am talking out my arse, again..... I believe we have neglected much needed spending on things like infrastructure, and the military, etc.... As with anything type of maintence, car, house, self.... The longer you delay, the cost will just rise accordingly. We can't worry so much about balancing the books, until we meet all our needs first. A well maintained car, will need less operating funds, and with that REALIZED savings, I can then pay down other debt, were its needed. That might be a poor analogy, but hey, its better than just saying, EAT ME ;D |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 12:32:37 The prepaid taxes would have landed in the December total, wouldn't it? As the raw numbers appear to say, the tax code change has brought money in that Should, IMO, call into question the forecast for the change causing a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit. Some of those dollars are taxes paid on the repatriation costs of corporations bringing cash home. The end result OF those dollars coming home and the business friendly environment that is now created should be increased jobs And manufacturing. That's a societal and national economy boost. The more exports, the fewer imports. That takes money off of one side of the ledger and puts it on the other. A true Win Win. The jobs building the new products to export creates employment for support structure. The employees spend their earnings. They buy stuff. The store has to have employees to sell the things to the people who are the newly employed beneficiaries of the newly created manufacturing plant. Just as the trade deals destroyed jobs and the lost revenue drove increased taxes, slowly choking the economy, this is the beginning of reversing that cycle. The budget is YUGE. I haven't read it, but how it could possibly be good escapes me. As for More military spending,, I would say Why? America spends more than the combined total of quite a few countries. Nobody comes close. I wonder if we haven't gotten so enamored with technology that we are spending more money to use the newest, most cutting edge, unproven Whiz Bang technology and turning our backs on effective equipment. I kinda think some of these high level military people want to spend our money to fund a project that will make them wake up in the morning feeling important. The F35 comes to mind. I wonder if an updated A10 wouldn't be a great investment. I thought the F 16 and 15 were really good planes. And Why Are we in so many countries? Why are we in Afghanistan? It looks to me like we are the aggressor in these recent wars. IDK WHY we have Done these things, but the crap we were told was the reason wasn't it. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/13/18 at 12:56:17 I did a google search for this and I only found highly conservative sites with this information I tried doing search just to get federal tax revenue numbers but didn't find anything concise and easy to follow (yes I'm lazy) so I'm not saying that CNS is wrong, but I'm suspicious of this claim. edit: I also found this on a debatepolitics forum that makes good sense, not my original though though: "The surplus months are January, April, June, Sept. Guess when estimated taxes are due. Guess when most people choose to pay end-year taxes: April, since it makes sense to owe under $1000 so you avoid the ET penalty but aren't effectively lending the government money (instead, hopefully, earning some sort of return on it), and then pay closer to the last minute. The same months are almost always going to be surplus months because that's when the revenue comes in. April runs the biggest surplus because that's both an estimated tax month and the month when most people put off paying end-year taxes on. Whether ET payment months are surplus months is also going to depend on whether or not there's any irregular government spending at the time; say, a war being fought. You can look at receipts by month here: https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/current.htm " there are a lot of other pragmatic thougths there on this issue as well probably shouldnt' be linking ti another forum, but.. . https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/309466-feds-collect-record-taxes-first-month-under-tax-cut-run-surplus-january.html |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 15:06:47 Hyperlink? Not sure what you call it, but the article has a blue text area that goes here. https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/current.htm I'm not loading the pdf. I figure if they link to the source, they didn't lie, but if I was skeptical, I'd hit the pdf. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/13/18 at 15:13:47 they might not be lying, but it's nothing surprising or new if you'd have read the rest of my last post... and, again, stealing from that other forum: "The increase in tax revenue follows an almost straight line of increases among Januaries since January 2013 and was not the biggest increase. Additionally, this is the 4th year in a row of setting that record. ...... that month of surplus is nothing special. I haven't seen anything the Trump administration has done to actually cut into the deficit." |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 15:39:13 I read about the January thing. I don't see the amounts. I forgot the number of January surplus versus deficit. In , IIRC, 13 years it was a six down and seven up record? I don't think they quite gave enough information to really evaluate the meaning of it. They did mention the quarter, and it looked pretty good. It's just the beginning, and I think the budget is a big mistake. Cutting social programs is gonna cost him. Especially while he is pumping the military up. Get the economy up and the social safety nets will be unburdened. It's just dumbernshit IMO. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/13/18 at 15:45:37 233C3A3D20271626162E3C307B490 wrote:
I don't disagree with that, you're starting to be reasonable.... or I'm slipping... :P |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 15:58:30 I haven't changed. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/13/18 at 17:04:17 0A151314090E3F0F3F07151952600 wrote:
Did that answer your question lost? ;D Only question I still have, if you two keep this up, can we expect a summer ceremony, and will Bot be the best man, or flower girl :-* |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/18 at 17:17:06 Let me expand on my answer. My attitudes and opinions, how I examine things and come to conclusions hasn't changed. What has changed is there is finally someone who doesn't necessarily agree, but will explain WHY not without being a snot. I've been waiting for someone to come along who can hear something they don't agree with and talk about it . That's been missing for a long time. So, I'm not so frustrated and I'm not Being someone who I don't want to talk to. There's more to say, nuance, etc, but I hope that's enough. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/14/18 at 10:42:27 405F595E43447545754D5F53182A0 wrote:
I was here before and I left because you were at total arrogant @ss. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/14/18 at 11:42:38 5B726F70786F716451726E695C6F69746E691D0 wrote:
I was here before and I left because you were at total arrogant @ss. [/quote] I hope you field this question without assigning it anything more than I'm just curious...... Why would you leave a place, based on the actions of another, if you like the place to begin with? Sorta reminds me of "white flight" or the "anti" freedom extending to others beliefs and views at Berkeley, etc. I think its fair for me to "assume" you really don't know the "real" Jog, only a perception of him based upon his "perceived" opposing views and beliefs..... And that is enough for you to what, not engage? I see this as part of a problem, as to why so many folks allow other to dictate a narrative, like the media, and to take advantage of it, for their OWN personal gain. I believe understanding(s) begin with dialogue, and hopefully we find more in common, that bridges can be built, upon those understandings, and our focus shifts to being positive of others, instead of trying to destroy, others. I feel we have historical evidence, to show the effect, and result, from that kinds of mentality, a lose, lose, scenario. Hope you do not take offense to this post, I am merely asking you straight up, if you can enlighten me.....thanks. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/14/18 at 12:45:35 Yeah, you Were here before. And I couldn't have a conversation with you. IDK what has happened to soften your ways and open you up to ideas that aren't what the news sources are pumping out, but I can discuss stuff with you now. Debate, tossing ideas back and forth, agree, disagree, try to show Why I believe what I believe, try to understand why you believe what you believe, Maybe I have softened some, IDK, that's something you can tell me. Whatever happened I'm digging it. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/14/18 at 14:11:36 6F7076716C6B5A6A5A62707C37050 wrote:
same back to you you wouldn't even entertain any idea that had been "tainted" by any mainstream news source or liberal ideal. you would almost violently reject that and the person offering them. you'd do the whataboutism and go off on your liberalism is evil tangents. and you wouldn't show why you believed anything, you still don't, you just expect us to trust you that you have all this great insight and knowledge about everything that we can't even comprehend. kept blasting that Cloward and Piven or Soros, or the Fed, or the Bilderburg group, or this or that.. you still don't stay on topic. and you were often just down right insulting. sometime in some kinda crazy hick spelling speak that was terrible to even try to read. it was a freaking nightmare. and you had MNSprings and Raydawg and Webstermark all backing you up and just pounding me with the conservative talking points over and over and over you were also so consumed with your hatred of Hillary that any defense of her was an automatic darnation of that person in your eyes. there was NO talking to you and since you had a whole posse around you, I needed out, I needed to find reasonable people before I turned into YOU. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/14/18 at 14:16:49 24372F32372131560 wrote:
I was here before and I left because you were at total arrogant @ss. [/quote] I hope you field this question without assigning it anything more than I'm just curious...... Why would you leave a place, based on the actions of another, if you like the place to begin with? Sorta reminds me of "white flight" or the "anti" freedom extending to others beliefs and views at Berkeley, etc. I think its fair for me to "assume" you really don't know the "real" Jog, only a perception of him based upon his "perceived" opposing views and beliefs..... And that is enough for you to what, not engage? I see this as part of a problem, as to why so many folks allow other to dictate a narrative, like the media, and to take advantage of it, for their OWN personal gain. I believe understanding(s) begin with dialogue, and hopefully we find more in common, that bridges can be built, upon those understandings, and our focus shifts to being positive of others, instead of trying to destroy, others. I feel we have historical evidence, to show the effect, and result, from that kinds of mentality, a lose, lose, scenario. Hope you do not take offense to this post, I am merely asking you straight up, if you can enlighten me.....thanks. [/quote] I kinda answered this in the above post to JOG, if you want more, pm me |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/14/18 at 14:19:32 Well, I hope we can put those frustrated feelings behind us and engage in conversations and see if we can bring the forum into a place where people actually debate. That said, if you haven't read what Cloward and Piven said, I wish you would. I think it's relevant. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/14/18 at 14:56:40 Thanks Lost, I hope you can continue to find value and hopefully fun, here. Just one little observation on your post to Jog, that you referenced to me. You said you needed to leave to find, be around those who have “reasonable” beliefs, etc.... Think about what you just said. Upon reflection maybe you meant you were overwhelmed and you needed to be around those of like mind. I believe you are honest enough from what/how, I have witnessed you and Jog dialogue lately, that you can see how such a declaration detracts from what you state you desire, yes? We all do it, not trying to be a snot, just trying to keep it real, as that really is our best chance at coming to a real honest understanding... Notice I didn’t say agreement ;D ;) |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/14/18 at 15:06:39 5F4C54494C5A4A2D0 wrote:
no, I meant reasonable. when you are "arguing/debating" someone and they spout off the craziest and most extreme conservative conspiracy theory in response and then yell about how evil liberalism is and then dismiss you completely as an evil SOB not worthy of their time. yeah, reasonable is what I was looking for, not like minded, I actually went in search of Trump supporters and conservatives and tried listening to Ben Shapiro podcast and Glenn Beck and even some unknown podcasts and just couldnt' stomach any of them, they always came back to ridiculing anything with the slightest liberal bend to them. I can handle being disagreed with, but when that person starts throwing insults and 2nd grade name calling back, and when I do it I get attacked as "see that's a liberal for ya!" kinda BS it' time to move on. unlike some on this board I actually go seeking both sides of an issue, not an unbiased view cause those dont' exist, but if only one side reports something, then yeah, I don't trust it. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/14/18 at 15:49:58 bi·as [ch712]b[ch299][ch601]s] NOUN prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair: "there was evidence of bias against foreign applicants Being unwilling to examine and judge the value of a differing position is biased. When a position has been examined and rationally discredited, not being willing to Reconsider it isn't bias. It's having weighed and measured something and decided it isn't something that one can agree with. The word Prejudice Needs to be understood. It's saying yes or no to what hasn't been logically thought through. Just like someone voting for or against someone because of race is racist. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/14/18 at 16:05:43 Lost: I can stick CNN into the exact same catergory that you insert FOX/conservatives, only opposite views, but same belief of they are right, the other POV, and demeanor, they find deplorable or unreasonable. There, we went in a circle. You believe and assign justification. They believe and assign justification. Have we solved anything? |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/14/18 at 16:20:33 32213924213727400 wrote:
the difference is, I subject myself to both, not just the side I agree with more often. and I do find that CNN doesn't peddle in "fearmongering" as much, they still do it, but not as much. now I find them that way, doesn't mean you will, I don't fear the same things you do. and both are very surface level coverage, so if needed, I'll do a deeper dive to find out more about the issue, again on both sides. |
|
Title: Re: Off to a good start Post by raydawg on 02/14/18 at 21:35:41 I read all as well, but I like Real Clear Politics as it gives you balance without having to leave their site.... I pretty much read one, then the other, and figger it’s somewhere between the two, but not always. What I find fascinating is folks do a 180, and act like it’s ok, if their guy is now peddling a different narrative. Folks like that are beyond reasoning. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |