Monday, December 20, 2010

Give it Up, Bax. It's not worth it.


No matter how many times you go over it, Jim thinks your facts are not the real facts.

I admit I find it fascinating that anyone who graduated the eight grade would argue that if poor persons are paying less tax because their incomes went down, then they should pay more tax; likewise, if rich people are paying more tax because their incomes went up, then they should pay less.

It's so flawed and puerile that it isn't even worth responding to.

I always wondered what that red-faced kid in college economics had written as an essay answer to merit a D- written boldly in magic marker on the top of his test.

Now I know.


Jim G. said...

Of course it is, what else is he going to do with his out?

Now...don't be snarky.

The D-, not so many.

Anyway, huh?

If income goes up and taxes are based on a percentage of income then...taxes are related to income.

My kids call it math facts.

Now, if you cut taxes, those paying the most will...get a tax cut.

If you are not paying any taxes get a credit! That's right a credit for not making enough money to pay taxes and unemployment insurance for 3 years and free health care and from where? From Obama's stash, that is where.

Your job proposal is...? Bridges? Head Start?

Lots of growth in bridges.

Baxter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Baxter said...

Doc -

Eric is right in that you should not baselessly claim things aren't true (ie CEOs paying lower tax rate than their secretaries and the US being the lowest tax nation in the western industrialized world) without supporting your argument. Now, I know you are not a legislator, but shouldn't you identify the peer countries with lower taxes? Even one? Shouldn't you tell us why secretaries in fact pay a lower rate of tax on their income than CEOs, contradicting the well known Oracle challenge?

If you have to make stuff up or deny the truth to win an argument, you lose per se. When you are tempted to do that, it means you ought to check your position. Maybe, your argument is all screwed up and would benefit from a dose of reality...

Bridges and Head Start, of course, help a great deal in times like these. We avoided the Great Depression vII thanks to the lessons of Keynes. When the chips were down, even GWB was a Keynesian.


Eric Martin said...

My specific jobs proposal is to double the employers deduction for the wages of any new hire for a three year period to commence immediately.

You have to keep the employee for the entire three year period or give back the excess deduction.

This would stimulate hiring practices directly rather than just give a tax break to my mother in law - who is not an employer.