Board 8 > Jesus Christ, Republican debate audience...

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'm not against the death penalty at all, but that's hilarious!

--
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/TazzyBoy
BlAcK TuRtLe is a black turtle.

Yep, I was right.

--
I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo
Now this is entertainment!

red sox 777 posted...
we need a flat tax for everyone where everyone pays the same amount in absolute dollars.

The US government took in ~$1.2 trillion in income tax in 2010. With around 300 million people, that would be around $4000 per person if you're counting minors, or somewhere on the order of $5300 if you're not. Do you really expect the unemployed to pay $5300 a year (assuming you don't expect even children to pay $4000!)? The tax structure is the way it is because there are diminishing returns in the utility of money; someone struggling to make ends meet has a hell of a lot more need of an extra $1000 dollars than Warren Buffet has of another billion.

--
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/2636/ivotedphoenixyi0.png

No, I don't, it would be utterly disastrous to the United States unless we simultaneously massively cut spending (slash the military, social security, and medicare to zero basically). But it's the logical conclusion of Smuffin's logic (and also theoretically not a distortionary tax).

--
90s games > 00s games

except (at least) one man was innocent

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/09/08/brian-williams-meet-cameron-todd-willingham/

--
Warning_Crazy
i am not black turtle as i did not win the guru

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

I think the issue here, as usual, is separating the micro from the macro.

Taxing production (income) rather than consumption (spending) discourages production and encourages spending. On the micro level, this is disastrous and makes poor people worse off. The government discourages not only them from working, but discourages them at an increasing amount the more they work. It also discourages the rich from investing, which creates jobs. Meanwhile, they are encouraged, and constantly told by the leftist media, that they have to spend money to "stimulate the economy." Keynesians don't care that an individual making minimum wage goes into massive debt to buy a bunch of stuff he doesn't need or can't afford. They think it's a good thing because it increases the aggregate demand. This of course, is awful for that person, awful for his creditors, and awful for the taxpayer as this individual will most likely end up supported entirely by government welfare.

In order to favor this policy, you have to somehow convince yourself that individuals across society acting against their own self-interest somehow makes society better off. This is completely and totally contrary to the most basic principles of free-market exchange. It is impossible to be both a Keynesian and a capitalist, because Keynesians reject the observable fact that individuals acting in their own self-interest makes all of us better off.

Now, you're correct that when you tax consumption rather than production, you decrease aggregate demand. Thing is, aggregate demand is a joke made-up concept that doesn't actually exist. A consumption tax encourages individuals to be productive, to invest, and to save. It discourages consumption. Now, it won't prevent people from say, buying food. You'll still consume, you will just be forced to more carefully prioritize your consumption. Which is better for each individual in the economy, and thus better for the nation as a whole.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

smartmuffin literally trying to blame palin being a nutjob on the media ITT

dead

Aggregate Demand = Aggregate Production

Companies don't produce products for which there is no demand. It's pretty simple.

--
90s games > 00s games

Or in other words, products are useless unless they're used, and money is worthless if it's never spent.

--
90s games > 00s games

Well, the idea of savings is that you spend it eventually, just not right that second. Or maybe you leave it to your children. But leftists don't want you to be able to do that either.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

I think we need to distinguish between liberal and conservative economists and liberal and conservatives non-economists. I don't think you're understanding the modern leftist economic argument at all. It actually does make sense, even if it isn't correct, and it's not an ideological argument, so it deserves some consideration beyond "this is so illogical it must be a communist plot."

--
90s games > 00s games

Easily done, as every President we've had since Coolidge has been a Keynesian. As are about 95% of Congress.

Keynesians and Communists aren't necessarily the same, but they share a lot of ideas back and forth.

Although I'm wondering exactly how you argue that something "makes sense" even if it isn't correct. Like, the broken window fallacy makes sense until someone explains to you why it is completely and utterly wrong. Krugman's idiotic suggestion that war is good for the economy makes sense until you realize that we already have three wars and the economy still sucks. Theories stop making sense when observable fact does the opposite of what they predict.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

Theories can make sense and be wrong when they're logical, but don't fit the data. Nobody really knows which of our modern economic theories are the closest to reality right now. Don't worry, we've long rejected 1930s Keynesian theory, but there's modern theories that share features of it.

--
90s games > 00s games

red sox 777 posted...
Theories can make sense and be wrong when they're logical, but don't fit the data. Nobody really knows which of our modern economic theories are the closest to reality right now. Don't worry, we've long rejected 1930s Keynesian theory, but there's modern theories that share features of it.

I still don't see why we cant prop up demand temporarily while we targetedly encourage capital formation within the country.

One is a short term solution that staves off people feeling screwed right now while the other ensures that when that gravy train dries up there are new jobs to actually be had.

This is what I've never understood about the right's position why must all supply side incentive be without strings.Why must the money be a hand out to corporation to do with what they see fit. I understand that you don't want government direction but this wouldnt be the quotas of the Soviet Union this would be " You can have the money so long as you use it here"

Its not unreasonable.

--
http://img.imgcake.com/nio/81edpngej.png

meh I was getting pretty fond of Ron Paul until I found out that he denies evolution

but I mean what the hell how do you make public statements as stupid as that in this day in age

--
Times punching Minipoooot: 46
"You Snake fans are as dumb as ever"- GANON1025 lol

also why are people trying to argue with someone who claps at the concept of over 200 people being killed and thinks that Sarah Palin is unpopular because of "propaganda"

--
Times punching Minipoooot: 46
"You Snake fans are as dumb as ever"- GANON1025 lol

i'd just like to point out again that one of the men was innocent and perry still proceded

--
Warning_Crazy
i am not black turtle as i did not win the guru

no worries, Perry loses no sleep over that. after all, it "takes balls to kill an innocent man."

jesus ****ing christ

--
Times punching Minipoooot: 46
"You Snake fans are as dumb as ever"- GANON1025 lol

Right because whether or not evolution exists and whether or not you personally believe in capital punishment are key issues that CONSTANTLY come up while executing the duties of President.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

Right because whether or not evolution exists and whether or not you personally believe in capital punishment are key issues that CONSTANTLY come up while executing the duties of President.

it's an indicator of ones sanity, if I said I believe a magical invisible unicorn was the supreme being that governs the universe that may not be something that really comes up in day to day decision making, but it would sure as hell make people question my ability to make important decisions.

meh I was getting pretty fond of Ron Paul until I found out that he denies evolution

he's got a lot of ridiculous things like that! he's a guy where when you read the pamphlet listing his positions, you're like "yeah sure I can agree with that." then you find out more about him and you're like "oh my god this guy is crazy actually."

Yeah Igloo Bob. Keep voting for Obama. Sure, he may be an unapologetic warmonger whose campaign promises were outright lies, but at least he believes in evolution! That's what's REALLY important!

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

Yeah Igloo Bob. Keep voting for Obama. Sure, he may be an unapologetic warmonger whose campaign promises were outright lies, but at least he believes in evolution! That's what's REALLY important!

I don't think I ever voiced support for Obama! He has significant issues also. He hasn't shut down Guantanamo, he has failed to pull us from Iraq, he's started new military action in Libya, he's continued Bush's decision to bail out banks and the auto industry without giving us any say in how those companies are run, he has caved on tax cuts to the rich at a time when the poor are hurting and the rich are the most rich they have ever been, and he's suggesting cuts to social security while ignoring that we literally pay 7 times more for our military than anyone else in the world.

Those are all significant issues to me. I view it as really unfortunate that his competition is even worse. There are a lot of people I would vote for over Obama but none of them are coming out of the Republican primaries.

Agree with Bob there.

I'm fed up with Obama, but that doesn't mean voting for Rick Perry or Ron Paul would be a better decision.

I'm actually thinking about not voting, honestly. I don't want to be here for more than 3 more years anyway.

--
"It is important that supporters and everyone at the club remembers that the cannon on the chest is more important than anybody."

Where are you considering moving?

--
Yoblazer: http://i43.tinypic.com/25z1non.jpg
Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world!

From: PartOfYourWorld | #176
Where are you considering moving?

England.

--
"It is important that supporters and everyone at the club remembers that the cannon on the chest is more important than anybody."

It just seems so odd to me that your prioritization of key issues seems to place "believes in evolution" above "wants to randomly start wars without congressional approval"

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

SmartMuffin posted...
It just seems so odd to me that your prioritization of key issues seems to place "believes in evolution" above "wants to randomly start wars without congressional approval"

believing in evolution = not a fundamentalist Christian. You're f***ing right it's a top priority.

--
ya right you are case the sunglasses have 3d so i can see right threw their clothes -ertyu
(about wearing sunglasses to stare at boobs without girls noticing)

That's interesting. I'm impressed that you're willing to admit in public that you're more concerned with someone's religion than with their actual policies.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

Not a single person in here has expressed anything other than "Obama is meh, but there is no superior alternative," SMuffin.

--
"It is important that supporters and everyone at the club remembers that the cannon on the chest is more important than anybody."

No, I'm pretty sure the last poster just expressed that being a fundamentalist christian is worse than being a warmonger.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

SmartMuffin posted...
That's interesting. I'm impressed that you're willing to admit in public that you're more concerned with someone's religion than with their actual policies.

I know what fundamentalist Christians stand for and I know what to expect from them. If they promise anything different, they're bulls***ting. I'm impressed that you're willing to think that this qualifies as "public." Wait, impressed was the wrong word, I meant embarassed for you.

--
ya right you are case the sunglasses have 3d so i can see right threw their clothes -ertyu
(about wearing sunglasses to stare at boobs without girls noticing)

I want a Christian as president, but not a fundamentalist of any sort. In my opinion, fundamentalism is stupid because it reflects the belief that there are certain fundamentals, and these are so important that you can safely ignore deeper analysis in favor of following them. The world isn't that simple.

--
90s games > 00s games

ExThaNemesis posted...
Not a single person in here has expressed anything other than "Obama is meh, but there is no superior alternative," SMuffin.

May not have been in this topic, but I said that Obama's potential is stifled by uncooperative peers who would rather hold the country at gunpoint than try to actually get stuff done.

--
I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo
Now this is entertainment!

SmartMuffin posted...
Right because whether or not evolution exists and whether or not you personally believe in capital punishment are key issues that CONSTANTLY come up while executing the duties of President.

if you saw a president say something like "the moon makes its own light and we should teach this in school," you'd have questions about his ability to make rational decisions. If you literally choose to deny factual evidence just because of preconceived notions, then you're not rational enough for me to vote for president.

not like it matters, Obama isn't losing this election anyway.

--
Times punching Minipoooot: 46
"You Snake fans are as dumb as ever"- GANON1025 lol

like seriously, saying evolution isn't real is so extremely far to the socially conservative right. I'd understand a loony type like Bachmann to say something like that, but wtf Ron Paul.

--
Times punching Minipoooot: 46
"You Snake fans are as dumb as ever"- GANON1025 lol

From: Biolizard28 | #185
ExThaNemesis posted...
Not a single person in here has expressed anything other than "Obama is meh, but there is no superior alternative," SMuffin.

May not have been in this topic, but I said that Obama's potential is stifled by uncooperative peers who would rather hold the country at gunpoint than try to actually get stuff done.

Indeed. But this wasn't a problem in his first two years, where he f***ed around pandering in the middle instead of trying to accomplish things that his voters got him elected based on.

--
"It is important that supporters and everyone at the club remembers that the cannon on the chest is more important than anybody."

The voters elected him based on his ability to give a good speech. One category in which he's actually delivered!

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized
http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif

There are two major problems with democracy in my opinion.

Firstly, people are stupid and uninformed. I would certainly fall under the second category, and even most people who think they are educated are not. As long as the will of the people holds sway, the country will reflect it's people, which is almost universally a bad thing.

Second, the elected leaders are too restricted. As they have to answer not only to the people, but to their political opposites they cannot take any real action. The recent debt crisis was a good example, neither side would give way to the other.

The problem with these problems is that they cannot realistically be solved without introducing far more problems. The ideal situation is most likely a benevolent dictatorship, and would you really trust anyone with that kind of power?

I have no idea why I wrote this >_>

--
MMBN style fighting game made by me in the link below!
http://sandbox.yoyogames.com/games/184947-b8bn

The voters elected him based on his ability to give a good speech. One category in which he's actually delivered!

I don't think so actually. He have great speeches in 2008, but they've been pretty lacking recently. Probably because the recent speeches basically can be summarized as, "Trust me and my team of experts, our plan will work eventually." Whereas his campaign speeches were fiery and inspirational about hope and change.

--
90s games > 00s games