Forbes: GOP bill "end of all economic sanity" in US, start of greatest fiscal disaster in US history

[HomerThompson]

Announced support for repeal of the mandate

 

[Limbo Pete]

They probably promised to let her personally start drilling in ANWR.

I wouldnt be shocked if Alaska gets some sort of big, shiny new highway/infrastructure-type money/project

 

[luckyshot]

Haha, neo-marxists in this thread and forbes still don't understand how markets operate or how you boost gdp.

All growth comes from capital investment, aka the rich. As for the deficit, absolutely if they make tax-cuts they also make budget cuts to balance, is this not the case? So what's the argument here?

Waiting for CBO to crush it.

Pshh. Trump’s tax cuts for billionaires will add a mere 1.7 trillion to the deficit.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-tax-plan-debt-cbo_us_5a03306ae4b04e96f0c70a68

 

[Trotsky]

All growth comes from innovation, which requires two things, competition and large capital investment. Since you need large capital investment you need rich people, and since you need competition it can't come from the government.

Sorry Marxists.

Hahahahahaha

Maybe check out the world before antitrust and labor laws. Check out the state of domestic and international competition before the dirty old government regulated the markets. You can go back even farther to pre-feudalism to see the fundamental limits of existing aggregations of wealth as a jumping off point.

Seriously, this is one of the funniest attempts to appear to understand economics that I have seen in a long while.

Signed,

A Marxist who still capitalisms better than you

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

If Trump's tax plan passes, I won't need to.

Ah so the right loves the gubernment as long as the gubernment is serving their social caste. More hypocrisy and lying from you guys.

Also, getting to keep more of what you earn isn't stealing from anyone else, despite what sophistry the left might tell you.

Taxes were established long ago as part and parcel of the larger social contract. You want to reap the benefits of society but dont want to pay your fair share to keep the gears running smoothly. You are a parasite.

 

[Tycho]

You're factually incorrect on this point. Was facebook capitally intensive? If not, how did that create value? What about service industries ie. selling expertise?

It seems you are confusing the concept of having any knowledge of economics, with shitposting.

Facebook? You mean the company boosted by capital investor peter thiel?

It seems you are confusing isolated cases from general trends. The two things which allow innovation to most likely succeed are capital investment and competition.

Can you create innovation via the government or without large capital investment? Sure, its just less likely.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jack we have had this convo before, just saying that "There's nothing in the law that would have had that effect." Does not change the negative outcomes i have faced since the passing of the law. Why would BCBS reps lie?

Lots of reasons. And you're making a classical thinking error. Your deductibles rising after the law passed doesn't mean it was because of the law. There's no mechanism that would cause that, and it's not the typical experience.

My deductibles went up drastically when the Not ACA was passed. Are you denying that there were mandates required for private and employer based coverage?

As in, under certain circumstances your employer has to offer you coverage? That's true. If you previously had coverage, your employer wouldn't be affected by that.

Why is your side so proud of coverage no one can use thanks to sky high deductibles?

Obviously that is not an accurate representation of reality. Most Americans are happy that their countrymen have increased access to care.

So if the health care costs are slowing down/going down, why has not helped my costs at all.. I do cut the checks so i know how much i am spending and these slow downs are not helping me.

First of all, let's stop for a moment and note that you've changed the discussion drastically. We were discussing the healthcare cost growth slowdown and the impact on debt. I assume you looked that up and saw I was right, and now we're just talking about your personal situation. So now I'll just note that anyone's individual situation can vary. Unemployment is very low now, but there are still people who have recently lost their jobs. When unemployment is high, there are still people who end dry spells and find jobs. Traffic deaths have been falling in America, but every day, people still die on the road. Etc. If you're one of the few people who has seen personal healthcare spending growth rise in an environment with overall falling cost growth, that's unfortunate, but it's not related to the factors that have caused cost growth to fall. Maybe you have particular motivation to support single payer, which probably would make more people better off (and would greatly ease the worst possible outcome).

 

[Tycho]

Hahahahahaha

Maybe check out the world before antitrust and labor laws. Check out the state of domestic and international competition before the dirty old government regulated the markets. You can go back even farther to pre-feudalism to see the fundamental limits of existing aggregations of wealth as a jumping off point.

Seriously, this is one of the funniest attempts to appear to understand economics that I have seen in a long while.

Signed,

A Marxist who still capitalisms better than you

I never claimed regulation is always a bad thing. Anti-trust laws are meant to help competition.

You seem to be under a misapprehension about my post. Innovation requires capital investment and competition, if the capital is concentrated within a select few this is bad for competition, hence the problem with feudalism/other undemocratic systems. The government has a place, it is there to protect the societal contract as a legal arbiter. I never argued agaimst regulation or labor laws, they exist to serve the social contract.

Any real Marxist or Trotskyist agrees that capital investment creates economic innovation, its the competition part you guys disagree with. So lets hear the argument for why capital investment from the state (in practice btw, no different to feudalism) without competition creates better results?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

The technology industry’s unemployment rate remained steady in the first quarter of 2017, at 2.5 percent, according to new data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). In addition, unemployment for a handful of key technology segments such as Web developers and computer systems analysts noticeably declined.

https://insights.dice.com/2017/05/02/tech-unemployment-rate-level-q1/

I work in IT. Wages are good and jobs are plentiful.

 

[Thycidides]

People have been saying this since Sarah Palin in 2008.

Back then, people thought the hillbilly faction of the GOP had finally gotten too dumb, too backward, too bigoted for the Chamber of Commerce side. There had to be a split.

There was no split but the hillbilly side definitely won that civil war and the CC side has had to tuck tail and just roll with the punches. Yeah, Trump is the most vulgar figure in modern history, but he's cutting taxes, and that's really all that matters.

You don't see that there is a split now? McCain and Collins voted against the OBamacare repeal, and I don't think they support tax cuts either.

I don't see how people like them work with Donald Trump on anything of importance/

 

[Rod1]

You don't see that there is a split now? McCain and Collins voted against the OBamacare repeal, and I don't think they support tax cuts either.

I don't see how people like them work with Donald Trump on anything of importance/

McCain voted against it because it was done in the shadows.

 

[MakeSherdogGreatAgain]

The answer is a smaller government. If the government is smaller, they don't need as much money to operate, therefore tax cuts are fine and they work. The problem is that the US government is too big. Too many entitlement programs, too many employees that don't do anything, and too many useless departments. There is no reason anybody should pay 40% taxes. That's completely ridiculous. People pay these crazy taxes to support the oversized government.

What if you or I went to our boss and said, "boss, I need more money. You're not paying me enough. I did my budget for next year and you're going to have to give me a 5% raise for me to spend everything I want to spend"...how many of you would get laughed out of the fucking room? Seriously. Why can't the government cut spending? We don't have to fund half of the shit that our taxes supposedly go towards. We're turning into this socialist country that always goes over the budget, and always needs to raise taxes. They get an insane amount of money from taxpayers every year...more than enough to get the deficit in check.

Forbes is a liberal outlet, much like the majority of the media. They'r going to trash anything Trump does or attempts to do.

 

[FIMN]

The answer is a smaller government. If the government is smaller, they don't need as much money to operate, therefore tax cuts are fine and they work. The problem is that the US government is too big. Too many entitlement programs, too many employees that don't do anything, and too many useless departments. There is no reason anybody should pay 40% taxes. That's completely ridiculous. People pay these crazy taxes to support the oversized government.

What if you or I went to our boss and said, "boss, I need more money. You're not paying me enough. I did my budget for next year and you're going to have to give me a 5% raise for me to spend everything I want to spend"...how many of you would get laughed out of the fucking room? Seriously. Why can't the government cut spending? We don't have to fund half of the shit that our taxes supposedly go towards. We're turning into this socialist country that always goes over the budget, and always needs to raise taxes. They get an insane amount of money from taxpayers every year...more than enough to get the deficit in check.

Forbes is a liberal outlet, much like the majority of the media. They'r going to trash anything Trump does or attempts to do.

I mean all fine, but cutting taxes and not reducing spending will explode the deficit. Trump has increased spending remember.

You could address the article in the OP rather than say it's liberal, when it is in fact written by a flat tax conservative.

 

[Rod1]

The answer is a smaller government. If the government is smaller, they don't need as much money to operate, therefore tax cuts are fine and they work. The problem is that the US government is too big. Too many entitlement programs, too many employees that don't do anything, and too many useless departments. There is no reason anybody should pay 40% taxes. That's completely ridiculous. People pay these crazy taxes to support the oversized government.

What if you or I went to our boss and said, "boss, I need more money. You're not paying me enough. I did my budget for next year and you're going to have to give me a 5% raise for me to spend everything I want to spend"...how many of you would get laughed out of the fucking room? Seriously. Why can't the government cut spending? We don't have to fund half of the shit that our taxes supposedly go towards. We're turning into this socialist country that always goes over the budget, and always needs to raise taxes. They get an insane amount of money from taxpayers every year...more than enough to get the deficit in check.

Forbes is a liberal outlet, much like the majority of the media. They'r going to trash anything Trump does or attempts to do.

Well, its a republican congress with a republican president, why cant they cut government?

Also Forbes being liberal is ridiculous.

 

[FIMN]

Facebook? You mean the company boosted by capital investor peter thiel?

It seems you are confusing isolated cases from general trends. The two things which allow innovation to most likely succeed are capital investment and competition.

Can you create innovation via the government or without large capital investment? Sure, its just less likely.

Your original argument was all value creation comes from the rich. Now you're arguing the opposite.

Please make up your mind.

Or better yet, discuss the tax cuts.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

You don't see that there is a split now? McCain and Collins voted against the OBamacare repeal, and I don't think they support tax cuts either.

I don't see how people like them work with Donald Trump on anything of importance/

Yeah and the Bush family said they wouldn't vote for Trump either.

Makes little difference though. A few GOP congressmen and senators here and there disagreeing on some wildly hideous legislation doesn't really equal a split, just some disagreement.

 

[Tycho]

Your original argument was all value creation comes from the rich. Now you're arguing the opposite.

Please make up your mind.

Or better yet, discuss the tax cuts.

No, it does come from the rich. What do you think large scale capital investment means? You can't read?

Who do you think starts 90% of companies? I know this is sherdog but i remember the war-room being semi-literate

 

[FIMN]

No, it does come from the rich. What do you think large scale capital investment means? You can't read?

Who do you think starts 90% of companies? I know this is sherdog but i remember the war-room being semi-literate

You said all growth. That was incorrect.

 

[Tycho]

You said all growth. That was incorrect.

I said growth comes from innovation buddeh