PDA

View Full Version : What a great analogy!



Uncle Bill
01-31-2009, 12:47 PM
Wading through a jillion emails again, yielded this gem of reality. Enjoy!

UB


Ice Cream & The Election

From a teacher in the Nashville area.

Who worries about "the cow" when it is all about the "Ice Cream?

The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third
grade this year. The presidential election was heating up and some of the
children showed an interest.

I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have.

We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids.

I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental
support. I had never met Olivia's parents.

The day arrived when they were to make their speeches.
Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a
better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Everyone applauded.

He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down. The
class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She surely could say
more. She did not have to.

A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream. Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a landslide.

Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and fifty-two percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream.
The other forty-eight percent of us know we're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess.

topshelf
01-31-2009, 04:32 PM
Isn't that the truth!!!

kb27_99
01-31-2009, 05:03 PM
Just read this out loud. My wife, 15 year old daughter, and I all agree!


Cheers,

Kevin

YardleyLabs
01-31-2009, 07:01 PM
And yet, when offered the apparent miracle of endless tax cuts and no cuts in service, Republicans vote feverishly in the belief, founded on who knows what, that they should be able to benefit without having to pay the bill. And thus we get our greatest deficits and the biggest increases in the national debt not from those tricky tax and spend liberals but from those good stalwart Republicans, Reagan and GWB. And when Bush 41 admitted that he had run out of smoke and mirrors and there were still bills to pay, he was abandoned and left to dangle slowly in the wind. Thanks to what GWB left behind, Obama will now break those deficit records. There may be some justification for this in the short term, but if he adopts the Republican mantra of deficit be damned, I hope he will get to retire to GWB's own ranch so we can at least save on security costs.

greg ye
01-31-2009, 07:32 PM
miracle of tax cuts and no cuts in service, Republicans vote feverishly in the belief, founded on who knows what, that they should be able to benefit...

Maybe because the Bush Tax Cut increased the total inflow of tax dollars to the government by 20%? Why did Bill Richardson of NM reduce tax in his state? To increase revenue? Tax cuts are stimulative!!!!!! Ever think that part of the GW deficit had anything to do with give and take negotiation?

YardleyLabs
01-31-2009, 09:14 PM
Maybe because the Bush Tax Cut increased the total inflow of tax dollars to the government by 20%? Why did Bill Richardson of NM reduce tax in his state? To increase revenue? Tax cuts are stimulative!!!!!! Ever think that part of the GW deficit had anything to do with give and take negotiation?

Ah, the great supply side myth. If that particular perpetual motion machine actually worked, the best governments would have no taxes but would simply print money as needed to pay their bills, stimulating massive growth.

In a growing economy, tax revenues go up. Tax revenues would have gone up more without the cuts. When there is excess capacity in the economy, as exists during a recession, government deficits can help "prime the pump" and stimulate growth. In this case, if the deficits are eliminated once growth is restored, the taxes generated as a result of the economic growth can pay down the debt incurred priming the pump. However, if the deficit continues after the economy has begun to grow, those same deficits will produce inflation, forcing restrictive monetary policies to slow growth.

Permanent tax cuts do not make sense unless accompanied with permanent spending cuts. What seldom gets mentioned is that government spending, either for hard goods or for transfer payments such as tax "credits" where no taxes have been paid, work just as well as other tax cuts in stimulating growth or stimulating inflation.

K G
01-31-2009, 09:54 PM
I notice you haven't posted on this thread Jeff.

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=35664

How do you like your pork? :cool:

kg

YardleyLabs
01-31-2009, 10:22 PM
I notice you haven't posted on this thread Jeff.

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=35664

How do you like your pork? :cool:

kg

My criteria for evaluating projects included in the the stimulus package (be they expenses or tax cuts) are:


The item should be able to be done quickly -- probably lasting no more than 24 months from now.
It should be non-recurring in nature: no on-going operating subsidies and no permanent tax cuts.
The jobs created should be for skills that will be transferable when the project ends.
The project should produce recurring economic benefits in the future without recurring costs (i.e., it's a true investment project)There's is not enough information to make any judgments about the items in the posted list. I suspect that whatever is done will include a mix of good and bad. Hopefully the former will outweigh the latter but the jury's out.

Cody Covey
02-01-2009, 03:56 AM
What seldom gets mentioned is that government spending, either for hard goods or for transfer payments such as tax "credits" where no taxes have been paid, work just as well as other tax cuts in stimulating growth or stimulating inflation.Jimmy Carter would agree and we all know how that worked. See the thing you are missing is that we aren't saying no taxes we are saying as little taxes as needed to run the federal government, what the constitution outlines anyway. If the states want to spend spend spend they have that right but when they go bankrupt like most are now they will eventually realize that people don't pay into the tax system if they don't have money to buy things. The federal government does not have a constitutional right to take my money via taxes and give it to another person that does not pay any taxes. Whether it has been done or not is not the point, please point out where in the constitution does it state that it has the power to tax for welfare.

YardleyLabs
02-01-2009, 07:27 AM
Jimmy Carter would agree and we all know how that worked. See the thing you are missing is that we aren't saying no taxes we are saying as little taxes as needed to run the federal government, what the constitution outlines anyway. If the states want to spend spend spend they have that right but when they go bankrupt like most are now they will eventually realize that people don't pay into the tax system if they don't have money to buy things. The federal government does not have a constitutional right to take my money via taxes and give it to another person that does not pay any taxes. Whether it has been done or not is not the point, please point out where in the constitution does it state that it has the power to tax for welfare.

Let me put the question a little differently. What makes you think the government doesn't have that power? The Constitution permits the government to levy taxes and to pass laws affecting inter-state commerce. The commerce clause has been interpreted very broadly since the country was founded. At the beginning of every bill you will find language stating the basis for the law. That will include language indicating how the law affects inter-state commerce. Given the mobility of people and goods between states, it is not very difficult.

The peak period of taxation in this country was, I believe, under Eisenhower. Since then, income tax rates have been reduced repeatedly by both parties. The first income tax charging those with higher incomes more than those with lower incomes was instituted in 1861 to help finance the Civil War. The first examples of governments using tax revenues to aid the poor are even older than that but the Federal government did not become directly involved on a systematic basis until the Depression both with surplus food distribution and with social security. "Welfare" as such remained a state responsibility until the 1960's when categorical aid programs were established serving the aged, the disabled, and families with dependent children. Interestingly, one of the factors that helped define this as a matter of inter-state concern was the practice of some states of buying bus tickets to send their poor to other states as a way of reducing welfare costs.

Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution provides that:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"

The key term here is "general Welfare".

section 8 concludes that:

"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

code3retrievers
02-01-2009, 08:02 AM
Interestingly, one of the factors that helped define this as a matter of inter-state concern was the practice of some states of buying bus tickets to send their poor to other states as a way of reducing welfare costs.
[/SIZE]


Its kind of like what Mexico does now with its citizens. Shows them where and how to cross the border so we can pick up the cost of running their country.,

Pete
02-01-2009, 10:21 AM
Jeff
When I first moved to PA I was floored ,,,pissed,,and had a contained phycotic reaction to all the different little taxes I'd had recieved.

The first tax I recieved was welcome to boyertown,,, here is a per capita tax welcome thanks for coming,,,,,, which means I had to pay a person tax on every member of my family,,, then before I new it I got hit with "The right to work tax" sure its only 10 bucks but its the thought that counts
then when tax time came around I found out that I had to pay a city income tax based on my 1040. Which was pretty steep. Then of course there were the townships taxes and county taxes I could't keep up with them all.





I realized I was no longer a free man but under government rule from that point on.

I would love to have sat in that session where people had voted on the right to work tax. Couldn.t they have just called it The give to welfare people tax. Or we are running out of words for taxes so lets call it the right to work tax.

I think you have lived in a tax everthing state for so long you have grown acustom to being taxed. and therefore see it as a necessity or just the way things are. I think most people who live in metropolitan areas see it that way which is evedenced by their voting stats.
Big city usually blue
Rural usually red. I would have no problem with big cities charging big taxes because I'm sure its costly to run a giant burocracy ,,but to reach out to all corners of a state to help fund the machine is just wrong.




I think some taxes are important but most spending is not.
But then again I'm part neandrathal so my wife claims.

Pete

greg ye
02-01-2009, 12:17 PM
Ah, the great supply side myth ...Tax revenues would have gone up more without the cuts. What seldom gets mentioned is that government spending, either for hard goods or for transfer payments ... work just as well as other tax cuts in stimulating growth or stimulating inflation.

So, the basic question becomes: Is the wealth of our nation derived from government or from the private sector? I think it's time to consider that the top 10% of wage earners contribute over 70% of the total tax dollars to our Federal Government- These earners are clearly a minority and should be afforded protections as a minority class!

Please explain to me why I sold property with a gain in "08" taxed at 15% but would have refused to sell same at a higher gains rate. Seems to me I contributed tax dollars under what I thought was a reasonable tax rate but would have avoided a higher tax.

Uncle Bill
02-01-2009, 01:53 PM
Gosh, Yardley... nobody is denying you your need to offset your guilt by paying MORE taxes if that's what turns your crank. Maybe if you would just offset the amount your fellow liberals like Dashole and others didn't pay, the budget could be balanced.

It's just impossible to try and explain tax cuts helping the economy to a group of sanctimonius tax-and-spend blind-siders. They would rather raise taxes to confiscatory levels, and then slyly evade their share, so the law abiding tax payer has to cover their azz.

UB

Cody Covey
02-01-2009, 03:08 PM
so Yardley then how much of my labor does the government own? How much can they take from me and give to someone else for the "general welfare" I and many others like me think that giving welfare payments to people actually hurts the "general welfare" of these United States. And states obviously can do what they want, within the constitution of course, thats the beauty of the states is that if you don't like one you move to another. When you rule the country from the federal level there is no getting away from this which is why we have states and not just one big country. Think people leaving from Michigan is a coincidence or that there is something more to do with having some of the highest taxes in the nation. Look at the states with the highest taxes and i can bet (yes this is a guess) that you will find the highest deficits.

YardleyLabs
02-01-2009, 06:10 PM
The various comments are interesting given that I never said anything at all about the appropriateness of how much was being paid in taxes. Rather I said two things:

- Federal taxes are constitutional for virtually any purpose adopted by Congress.

- From a purely economic perspective you can stimulate the economy with either tax cuts or spending.

Neither of these comments was addressed by any of the responses. I also said that, over time, our governments should pay their bills and that Republicans as a group and Reagan and Bush in particular had been bad at doing that. This comment was also not addressed.

Interesting.

On the question of amounts paid in taxes and whether they are too high, I'll make a few observations.

As of 2005 (the most recent year for which data are available), the average effective tax rate from all Federal taxes (income, social insurances, corporate income taxes, excise taxes, etc) was 20.5%. This compares with an average effective Fderal tax rate in 1979 of 22.2% -- so much for all those increases...

As of 2005, the average effective tax rate for the top 20% of households (measured by income) was 25.5% while for the bottom 80% it was 11.5%. The average income for the top 20% was $231,300 while for the bottom 80% it was $49,250.

In 1979, the average income for the top 20% was $132,100 and the average income for the bottom 80% was $42,425. Thus, incomes for the highest 20% grew 82% and incomes for the bottom 80% grew 16%. In that same period, income for the top 1% grew 201%. These figures are all expressed in 2005 dollars. For the bottom 40% of households, income grew only 5%. Obviously all these numbers are a sure sign of our inexorable march towards a socialistic redistribution of income. (Source fdata or Federal tax numbers is at http://home.att.net/~rdavis2/efftax05.html (http://home.att.net/%7Erdavis2/efftax05.html) and comes from the Congressional Budget Office)

When state and local taxes are added to the picture, the difference in effective tax rates between the richest and the poorest as a percentage of income declines since state and local taxes are almost all regressive in nature. That is, the lower your income, the higher a percentage of your income goes to pay taxes.

My personal belief is that the shift in income to the wealthiest few from everyone else over the last 30 years has been a major contributor to our current economic problems and that, in addition, it will lead to increasing political instability. I believe that some of our taxes are poorly designed and have a distorting effect on the economy (e.g. corporate income taxes). However, I do not believe that our taxes are so high that they discourage work.

I believe that persistent spending deficits in both good times and bad are destructive to the economy and that, over time, government budgets must be balanced. If taxes are to be cut, spending should be cut immediately and equally. If spending is to be increased for any purpose including war, taxes should be increased immediately to cover the cost. There is no free lunch. If government deficits or surpluses are needed at a point in time to achieve economic stability, I believe the variances should come in the form of non-recurring tax credits or tax surcharges or in the form of increases or reductions in true capital spending. Temporary situations should not become the excuse for permanent imbalances that will create new problems in the future.

Finally, if the form of policy discipline I suggest were actually implemented, I suspect that the electorate would probably prefer slightly higher taxes than the reduction of services needed to keep taxes at their current rates. However, I may be completely wrong. The benefit of the approach I suggest is that it imposes accountability for the decisions made so the electorate can make a choice between real options rather than between either party's wannabe dreams and irresponsible financing of current consumption against my grandchildren's futures.

Henry V
02-02-2009, 12:01 AM
There you go again Jeff, trying to argue on point and with the facts on your side.

Can't you work on blaming the messenger, blaming the media, or diverting to some other subject slightly off topic.Also you may want to try to globally using the words republicans, right wing, or conservative in a derogatory sense as much as possible, but then again why stoop to that level?

Let us know when you need to start typing with two hands.

Uncle Bill
02-02-2009, 12:22 PM
When you do start typing with both hands, please remind everyone where we are not taxed enough. You might even provide us with a little levity as to what you pay...I'm sure it will be a bundle...but then you and global warming buddy Henry V are looking forward to more. I say, why wait? Send in all ya got. It may resolve your guilt for not paying enough.

Here's an oldie that hasn't been around for a while, just as a reminder of how much we ARE taxed already.

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want those 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.
A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of it's releases.
A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
A billion minutes ago Jesus was still alive!
A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the stone age.
A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
BUT…A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending money!

Washington , D. C. HELLO! Are all your calculators broken??

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL License Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax Real Estate Tax
Service charge taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax (Truckers)
Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Utility Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago... and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt... We had the largest middle class in the world... and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

And now I need to press "1" for English! What the he!! happened??


Bend over y'all... Jeff, and Henry, and their liberal constituants have far more need for your money than you do. And after they grease the nation with their pork, that's just the beginning of the fiasco. Once the printing presses produce the paper to provide these handouts, what you have left won't be worth a dime on the dollar. You MAY have thought Jimmy Carter had the market cornered on inflation, but after this current batch of socialists get done, you won't have anything worth passing on to your grandkids.

Did I hear anyone whisper gold?

UB

Henry V
02-02-2009, 12:39 PM
Bill,

You had to hit the old archives for that one, eh?

Please let me know when your state is going to pay its own way rather than rely on others' federal taxes to exist, but I will give you some credit, your state did slip to #10 as of 2005, and only received $1.48 for every $1.00 in federal taxes or just under $10K per capita. Keep up the good work.

To stay true to your ideology, maybe you should move to a low tax state that also has a low return rate. The only state that comes close is Utah. All the other states in the bottom 10 for federal tax burden appear to be in the top 20 for return on tax dollars with most in the top 10. Interesting.

YardleyLabs
02-02-2009, 01:23 PM
When you do start typing with both hands, please remind everyone where we are not taxed enough. You might even provide us with a little levity as to what you pay...I'm sure it will be a bundle...but then you and global warming buddy Henry V are looking forward to more. I say, why wait? Send in all ya got. It may resolve your guilt for not paying enough.

Here's an oldie that hasn't been around for a while, just as a reminder of how much we ARE taxed already.

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want those 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.
A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of it's releases.
A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
A billion minutes ago Jesus was still alive!
A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the stone age.
A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
BUT…A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending money!

Washington , D. C. HELLO! Are all your calculators broken??

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL License Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax Real Estate Tax
Service charge taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax (Truckers)
Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Utility Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago... and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt... We had the largest middle class in the world... and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

And now I need to press "1" for English! What the he!! happened??


Bend over y'all... Jeff, and Henry, and their liberal constituants have far more need for your money than you do. And after they grease the nation with their pork, that's just the beginning of the fiasco. Once the printing presses produce the paper to provide these handouts, what you have left won't be worth a dime on the dollar. You MAY have thought Jimmy Carter had the market cornered on inflation, but after this current batch of socialists get done, you won't have anything worth passing on to your grandkids.

Did I hear anyone whisper gold?

UB

Once again, where did I call for more taxes? All I did ask is that we not spend what we don't raise for taxes. Does that make you one of those spend but don't tax Republicans?