Economy Trump tax cuts 6 months later: it was exactly what critics projected - everyone but the rich suffers

[computer fogie]

...*completely ignores buisiness moving back to our country...

Source, vs. businesses moving their manufacturing out of the country? Or are you "just shitposting, not trying to have an actual discussion" again?

 

[Jack V Savage]

OK. Friedman rejected basic government standards for safety requirements on motor vehicles in favor of free consumer choice. There is a famous video of a young Michael Moore debating Friedman about this.

Do you agree with Friedman that the government shouldn't be involved in enforcing safety standards for motor vehicles?

No, that's stupid (and outside his area of expertise anyway). And allowing people to rip the public off isn't "free consumer choice." Consumers choose to put an end to that stuff. A big part of how we were able to get infant mortality down from over one in five to under 1% is regulating milk (which is what got the ball rolling on consumer protections in general).

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

No, that's stupid (and outside his area of expertise anyway). And allowing people to rip the public off isn't "free consumer choice." Consumers choose to put an end to that stuff. A big part of how we were able to get infant mortality down from over one in five to under 1% is regulating milk (which is what got the ball rolling on consumer protections in general).

OK. So you don't agree with Friedman on one of the most fundamental issues of the free market: free consumer choice.

So.... What do you agree with him on? (you said you agree with him more than I do, so what is it)

 

[Jack V Savage]

OK. So you don't agree with Friedman on one of the most fundamental issues of the free market: free consumer choice.

So.... What do you agree with him on? (you said you agree with him more than I do, so what is it)

Oh, lord. I hope you're just some kid on summer break and not an adult who thinks that this is good posting. I pointed out to you that he was much more orthodox on economics than you seem to think, and rejected Austrian quackery.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

Oh, lord. I hope you're just some kid on summer break and not an adult who thinks that this is good posting. I pointed out to you that he was much more orthodox on economics than you seem to think, and rejected Austrian quackery.

No. You said you bet you agree with him on more things than I agree with him on. Obviously you don't know much about him. Have you ever read Free to Choose? Just curious....

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

If a tax were to seriously compromise certain or all subjects' good chance at a decent quality of life, it would be unjust.

And who's to decide when this threshold has been crossed?

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

No, I make no such assumption. I said that I made up the numbers. And it's an example.

On the larger scale, he doesn't just use the same amount of road. He uses more of the total infrastructure, some of it direct, some of it indirect because of the effect on others within the economic chain. In reality, we can't break it down to units of road or units of electricity but we can generally break down that it takes more inputs to increase outputs. And those who are using a greater percentage of the inputs, in aggregate, are expected to pay a tax that reflects that.

You ignored the part where he could have earned double what he was making initially without using any more road at all.

 

[Black Helicopters]

Yeah, that's pretty much it. We're borrowing a truckload to give money to rich people, essentially.

I love it

 

[MicroBrew]

Government officials don't act for their own financial gain? Or make rules that keep their positions of power? Huh? What world do you live in?

Not like a self employed business owner. An official / personnel at the EPA works to enforce laws that protect all of us, they don't profit from it. Now some high ranking members might be swayed by politician lobbying but while they are in office they don't directly financially profit. Government officials and scientists working at the National Labs and authorizing funding aren't profiting; they just earn a paycheck. If you started a Lab, you would directly profit from any invention you or your employees came up with.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

Not like a self employed business owner. An official / personnel at the EPA works to enforce laws that protect all of us, they don't profit from it. Now some high ranking members might be swayed by politician lobbying but while they are in office they don't directly financially profit. Government officials and scientists working at the National Labs and authorizing funding aren't profiting; they just earn a paycheck. If you started a Lab, you would directly profit from any invention you or your employees came up with.

Are you fucking kidding me? Are people really this dense in this world?

The EPA ONLY has a financial incentive:
The EPA actually has no concern for the environment, they just happen to use the environment as a cover story to create laws and gain an advantage for the companies that lobbied for exemptions to the agency’s regulations, and to collect money in fines.

 

[MicroBrew]

Are you fucking kidding me? Are people really this dense in this world?

The EPA ONLY has a financial incentive:
The EPA actually has no concern for the environment, they just happen to use the environment as a cover story to create laws and gain an advantage for the companies that lobbied for exemptions to the agency’s regulations, and to collect money in fines.

You sound like a CT or fringe theory proponent. The EPA by and large exists to protect the public. Yes there are issues, but having them is better than not having an EPA at all.

How does the EPA profit when they force the major commercial and consumer vehicle manufactures to increase fuel economy and cut down on pollutants? What companies lobbied the EPA to force these regulations and how do they profit from it?

 

[whougonnacall]

OK. Friedman rejected basic government standards for safety requirements on motor vehicles in favor of free consumer choice. There is a famous video of a young Michael Moore debating Friedman about this.

Do you agree with Friedman that the government shouldn't be involved in enforcing safety standards for motor vehicles?

Isnt that the one friedman makes himself look retarded by arguing that inheritance tax removes incentive for family orientated people to get rich?

 

[whougonnacall]

I'm not defending any of those ideas, I believe all taxation is theft and it is fundamentally evil.

by the same logic isnt enjoying the benefits of the public services provided by those taxes and not paying also theft?

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

by the same logic isnt enjoying the benefits of the public services provided by those taxes and not paying also theft?

Yes. It's an entire system of theft.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

Isnt that the one friedman makes himself look retarded by arguing that inheritance tax removes incentive for family orientated people to get rich?

I don't remember, but why is that retarded?

 

[Deleted member 159002]

And who's to decide when this threshold has been crossed?

Elected officials, just like with any other policy.

 

[MeatheadMike]

Yes. It's an entire system of theft.

If taxation is theft, and using government services is also theft in your book... then what kind of system are you proposing? Anarchy?

 

[sickc0d3r]

I believe all taxation is theft and it is fundamentally evil.

I'm not a fan of paying taxes, but it's not really theft, it's more like the cost of membership. You get some things in return (like state enforced property rights), and you get to vote for or against funding some of those things. If you don't like the tax rates you can try to change them, and finally no one is forcing you to stay and remain a member. That doesn't sound like theft.

 

[whougonnacall]

I don't remember, but why is that retarded?

Theres no other benefits to your family if you get rich other than inheritance tax ? None?

 

[whougonnacall]

Yes. It's an entire system of theft.

So if i enjoyed those services without paying and say instead it was a private not goverment providing them thats also theft too no?