It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tax the rich? Statistics show Alexandria Cortez May be right

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96



She does have a degree in Economics.


If she did. She wouldn't be an avowed socialist.

Maybe she should get a refund.


Quite a lot of economics graduates and professors are socialist. Economics, even relatively main stream economics,is a broad kirk.


So effing what ?

Doesn't make them right.

Makes them stupid as hell for NOT even understanding the SNIP they want.



Because people who have different opinions from you must be stupid?




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: pexx421

Well, based on the chart in the article, it strikes me that the secret to a vibrant US economy is another World War. Taxes remained high for decades after WWII, but the massive GDP growth only continued in the waning years of the war and the few years afterward. Maybe we should remove Russia from the Ukraine or drop a couple of thermonuclear warheads on Tehran and toe the GDP in the butt a bit based on the charts, yes?


But How big a war? The Afghan and Iraq wars never stimulated the economy like WW2 did. And I feel like the Vietnam war had an overall negative impact on the economy, I could be wrong. LOL



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96



She does have a degree in Economics.


If she did. She wouldn't be an avowed socialist.

Maybe she should get a refund.


Quite a lot of economics graduates and professors are socialist. Economics, even relatively main stream economics,is a broad kirk.


So effing what ?

Doesn't make them right.

Makes them stupid as hell for NOT even understanding the SNIP they want.



Because people who have different opinions from you must be stupid?


In this case yes.

Because all anyone has to do is point to a failed socialist state like Venezuela, or the Union of Soviet SOCIALISTS 'Republic'.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420
What worked in post WW2 economic environment will not work in post 2018 economic environment.

This is something almost every economist agrees on, regardless of their political leanings. Time has made the world is a very different place, and will require a different solution.



That is very true.

Liberalisation of capital controls, floating exchange rates and greater global integration of economies make now very different from then.

Trying to apply 1950s fiscal policy to 2019 is unlikely to be successful.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Korea are examples of what happens when you don't fight a war to win the war. WWII was the last example of a war the US fought in with the solitary intention of kicking other nations' asses into submission. You can waste money on war, or you can invest in annihilating an enemy while seeking avenues to make the war pay for itself and then some.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   
this was gone over with a fine tooth comb when Bernie was running, he also said just tax the rich it will pay for everything and every single number cruncher I saw listened to, or read about said the same thing... the math didn't work when you added in all the free stuff he wanted to give away.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

...an accurate statement with a misplaced question mark, in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
It was a scam that put us into the rigged stock market to gamble for retirement, rather than pensions that were set aside from the profit created by our works. At any rate 25% of the stock market is the bottom 95% the rest is the top earners, but that’s just a part of it. It’s also the banks, the federal reserve, the monopolists who privatize public infrastructure, the real estate owners who raise rent without increasing the size or quality of their properties. These are the things that contract a market and they are where all the growth has been from the bailouts to the tax break to the quantitative easing. We are de industrializing and now all the increase in profits made are made by extracting them from workers in higher rents, fees, interest, etc.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
But How big a war? The Afghan and Iraq wars never stimulated the economy like WW2 did. And I feel like the Vietnam war had an overall negative impact on the economy, I could be wrong. LOL


Big enough that you are the only major manufacturing power that is still a manufacturing power.

Another thing, post WW2, that no longer applies.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: neo96



She does have a degree in Economics.


If she did. She wouldn't be an avowed socialist.

Maybe she should get a refund.


Quite a lot of economics graduates and professors are socialist. Economics, even relatively main stream economics,is a broad kirk.


So effing what ?

Doesn't make them right.

Makes them stupid as hell for NOT even understanding the SNIP they want.



Because people who have different opinions from you must be stupid?


In this case yes.

Because all anyone has to do is point to a failed socialist state like Venezuela, or the Union of Soviet SOCIALISTS 'Republic'.


You think socialists in the US are wanting the US to be more like them rather than the highly successful social democratic countries?



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: amazing
But How big a war? The Afghan and Iraq wars never stimulated the economy like WW2 did. And I feel like the Vietnam war had an overall negative impact on the economy, I could be wrong. LOL


Big enough that you are the only major manufacturing power that is still a manufacturing power.

Another thing, post WW2, that no longer applies.


That's not true though, China is ahead of us and Japan is a close third. And that list changes based on what's being manufactured.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Y’alls version of economic policy blew the economy in 08 and it’s getting ready to blow it again. The whole current system is set up to extract all your surplus income to the bankers and exploiters. In 08 Obama chose to save the banks, stocks, and housing bubble rather than the economy. Trump added to that with the tax breaks last year. All that will come due with revenge next year, 2021 at the latest. The “job creators” y’all venerate spent all the trillions from the bailout and the tax breaks on stock buybacks and dividends to artificially inflate their value and give themselves huge bonuses while not producing any more value. Our banks only loan money to corporate raiders who are expected to cannibalize pensions and cut workers and wages to pay the bank, not to create new businesses. Our whole economy is in cannibalize mode, with personal debt growing, and wages still stagnated. These are not the signs of good economic policy, and have nothing to do with socialism. It’s unfettered capitalism, rule by capital, and is exactly what happens anytime banks and other exploitative methods are unregulated through all of history. This is how Rome collapsed.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

Social Security is not a pension and is wholly inadequate to that purpose. There is also no funding mechanism adequate to keeping workers on pensions as it stands. The reason the Big Three auto makers were in so much trouble was because they owed so much in pension to their former workers that they were functionally only making a couple thousand per vehicle to cover everything else.

And, no, the government cannot play sugar daddy for it either. Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare eat up the lion's share of the Federal Budget as it is and they will still go insolvent without serious restructuring of the system.

401(k) savings are currently the most viable options out there because interest rates do not return on your savings accounts. Thank the Fed for that.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

The bailouts were socialization of risk with privatization of profits, which is in no way "capitalism.:



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry but I don't want a minimum wage bartender making my countries tax policy.


She does have a degree in Economics. Not that that necessarily means much.


And Obama won a Noble Peace Prize.

Apparantly any idiot can receive a degree or win a prize lol.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry but I don't want a minimum wage bartender making my countries tax policy.


She does have a degree in Economics. Not that that necessarily means much.


And Obama won a Noble Peace Prize.

Apparantly any idiot can receive a degree or win a prize lol.


Again I agree

www.seattletimes.com...




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
Funny how so many other companies managed pensions for so long just fine. Seems like malfeasance or mismanagement to me. At any rate, no social security is not pension. Pension is pension. My mother has 3 of them. From before businesses got too greedy to put aside some of the profit each worker made to that workers pensions. The stock market is a scam where Goldman Sachs or other groups get a huge windfall every time a business goes public then leave everyone else holding the bag. And moving people’s retirement to that stock market was just a way to artificially inflate said market so hedge fund managers and corporate execs could give themselves huge bonuses too. Interesting how the pension funds usually the ones holding the junk equity stocks and most likely to get wiped out during crashes.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Sharing of risk is not socialism, but that’s ok. I don’t expect you to understand what socialism is. Most people don’t, they just assume what they hear about it from the msm and right wing pundits must be true.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Sharing of risk is not socialism, but that’s ok. I don’t expect you to understand what socialism is. Most people don’t, they just assume what they hear about it from the msm and right wing pundits must be true.



Sorry it fails to fit your world view, but yes, "sharing" of risks is a form of socialism. Mark Green had some astute comments about it, calling it "lemon socialism" in the 70s when the government bailed out Con Edison.
www.nytimes.com...

Critics fear that a rush to public ownership may bring a form of “lemon socialism"—where the government, as in England, takes over failing companies, but not healthy ones. “Con Ed as a local municipal?” Larry Hobart of the American Public Power Association asked theoretically last week. “It could give us a black eye.”


That was the bailouts. Sure as hell wasn't capitalism, as capitalism dictates that failing companies be permitted to fall on their ass and be left behind same as it dictates successful companies be allowed to succeed as greatly as they can.

I know what socialism is, it is a direct violation of Darwin's Survival of the Fittest, by which populations ascend to higher highs and greater successes when those within the population who are sick, weak, or incapacitated are allowed to perish for the betterment of the society itself. In a meritocracy, bailouts would never happen and the country's economy would be as strong as hardened steel.

By the way, please, please call Mr Green a "right wing pundit." That would make my day considering he was Ralph Nader's right hand man.
edit on 9-1-2019 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

Dang Pex, I admire your motivation. This probably could change the world but will we ever overcome the brainwashing.

So I kept on listening and researching into Mr. Hudson. I still really enjoy what he has to say. Coming from a personal belief that free markets are everything, it is still a struggle to honestly listen to what he is saying.

I like how he brought up the fact that the majority of our economical language is completely backwards from the original meaning before the 20th century. Ideas from Marx have been corrupted. Ideas from Smith have been corrupted.

When they created the original theories of free markets, they meant free from the parasites. Free from the banks. Free from the wealth extractors and leeches upon society. Then in early 1900s, they completely corrupted the meaning to mean free for all. Free to rape and pillage the society by the sociopaths. Those without scruples that will lie, cheat and steal everything and anything they can get away with.

He proposes that we are exactly opposite from a free market society today. They have corrupted the terms and definitions. Through that corruption, they have decimated our financial society and reshaped it to THEIR will.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join