|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
20th November 2017, 07:44 AM | #1 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092
|
Forbes: GOP Tax Bill Is The End Of All Economic Sanity In Washington
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancol.../#774a835f77ef
Originally Posted by Forbes
How can any intellectually honest Republican not be ashamed of these bait-and-switch con jobs? 2018 needs to be the year that this version of the GOP dies an ignoble death, and good riddance. |
20th November 2017, 07:48 AM | #2 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
Of course a liberal rag like forbes would say that.
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
20th November 2017, 07:51 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
It seems the point of the article is that this tax bill hurts their donors through inflation.
|
20th November 2017, 08:20 AM | #4 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 37,581
|
Then I think you have misunderstood the article.
My reading of the article is that:
|
20th November 2017, 08:31 AM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
20th November 2017, 08:43 AM | #6 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,090
|
But they don't know that they would.
They think that they're each special, gifted, harder-working, and worth more than other people and would still come out ahead. They rationalize this foolish self-centered idiocy with rationalizations such as thinking it's the only way to keep them and others strong, that there is no other way, that it makes the weak stronger by making them fight for it (by having the price of failure be catastrophic and the rewards stratospheric), that the 'losers' deserve it and after all, they are not losers. Many just want to hurt the 'losers'. Many have been buying their own dog food for too many years to see it. Otherwise rational people think that they'd be fine even with massive civil unrest. Even the mechanism so beloved by libertarians of 'rational self-interest' fails hard when the group is not being rational. They would be hurt by a downturn, that should be enough to make them support a better policy, but not enough of them believe they would be hurt. They're 'special'. |
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong |
|
20th November 2017, 09:49 AM | #7 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 37,581
|
Which is it, downturn or inflation
In any case, you claimed that:
Quote:
If you meant that it's one of many points made in the article then I think that your comment is very poorly worded. |
20th November 2017, 10:26 AM | #8 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
|
It probably wouldn’t result in inflation. The Fed largely controls that with monetary policy. It would however force the Fed towards tighter monetary policy that would raise interest rates and wash away any of the hoped for economic growth.
|
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen" |
|
20th November 2017, 10:29 AM | #9 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
|
One danger of having a bumbling imbecile of epic proportions as POTUS is the normalization of comparatively normal, fact-challenged, Rand-worshiping ideologues such as Ryan.
|
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
|
|
20th November 2017, 10:30 AM | #10 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
So the article discusses the economic disaster this bill would create by inflation? Is this your side admitting what tax cuts do but ignoring the revenue coming in?
Quote:
Quote:
Electing Dems instead of republicans goes from stupid to insane! |
20th November 2017, 10:51 AM | #11 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,811
|
|
20th November 2017, 10:58 AM | #12 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,745
|
A different contributor at Forbes interprets those same economic conditions as indicators of a recession. I don't know which author at Forbes to believe.
|
20th November 2017, 11:00 AM | #13 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
20th November 2017, 11:02 AM | #14 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
|
“our side” has long understood that fiscal stimulus of any kind puts upwards pressure on inflation and interest rates. The real question is when such upward pressure is desirable and when it is not. Under current economic conditions it is not, so it would create a massive amount of new debt for doing something actively harmful to the US economy. The ultimate lose-lose.
2/3 of US government spending is Mandatory and can't be cut without massive cuts to programs that heavily benefit a block of voters (Seniors) that lean heavily Republican. Significant cuts to Mandatory spending would require new laws be enacted to strip this group of existing benefits so we can surmise that no such cuts will occur under Republican leadership. 2/3 of discretionary spending go to Defence and Security, areas Republicans ant to increase spending. Much of the remaining 8%-10% of the US budget is still on essential services like highways, the court system, and also cannot reasonably be cut. What's left after that almost all shows a positive ROI, so in the long run cuts would cost more than the programs themselves. The end result is that Republican leadership would almost certainly increase spending in the long term over and above what would be seen under Democrats. Combined with large decreases in revenue being proposed the inevitable outcome is a massive increase in US debt. |
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen" |
|
20th November 2017, 11:05 AM | #15 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
On the plus side this tax bill will solidly destroy what is left of science in our universities so that is a win for conservatives. No one is going to be able to afford to get advanced degrees in science anymore.
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
20th November 2017, 11:13 AM | #16 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,589
|
It seems Forbes hasn't gotten the memo: Deficits and increased national debt are only bad when a Democrat is the president. Most likely we won't really see the deficit ramp up until after a Democrat has replaced Donald Trump, at which point the deficit will be said Democrat's fault.
|
20th November 2017, 11:15 AM | #17 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
|
Auntie Em, it's a twister!
|
20th November 2017, 11:27 AM | #18 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 37,581
|
|
20th November 2017, 11:31 AM | #19 |
Disorder of Kilopi
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 17,621
|
|
__________________
"His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks." - Da Joik |
|
20th November 2017, 12:20 PM | #20 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,811
|
Here is a different opinion from Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/preston.../#2d4917074876 What % of graduate students receive stipend and tuition assistance? I couldn't find the answer. But I do know when I got my masters degree I had to pay my tuition plus I had to pay taxes on the income I earned from a non university job that I used to pay my tuition. |
20th November 2017, 12:35 PM | #21 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
Depends on the field. In the hard sciences it is near 100% certainty for those going into research. It will not effect many doctorates but it will destroy the hard sciences.
We will see all the grad students in many science departments drop out if this passes. https://www.wired.com/story/grad-stu...hey-should-be/ "For years, PhD candidates have "paid" for their educations almost exclusively through research and teaching—working in labs, TAing courses, hosting office hours. It works like an apprenticeship: Trade five years of your life learning and working in a field that interests you in exchange for a meager, but livable, salary. "The point is to be stressed about class work and research—not finances," Coston says. Fewer than 10 percent of PhD candidates in STEM fields rely primarily on their own money to pay for grad school; and in 2015, more than three-quarters graduated with no debt. (At least from their graduate programs; plenty of graduate students complete their PhDs burdened with debt from their undergrad years.)" So as a nation we will say goodbye to science education and advancement. |
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
20th November 2017, 01:16 PM | #22 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,110
|
|
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good. |
|
20th November 2017, 02:07 PM | #23 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092
|
Well, if you had read the very next paragraph in the article, you wouldn't need to ask that:
Originally Posted by Forbes
Well, either you must be very rich or you don't know what this bill actually does (or maybe you just aren't familiar with the term "bait and switch"?), because most of us are not going to "get more of our money back." You've been conned. |
20th November 2017, 02:50 PM | #24 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,248
|
|
__________________
"Facts are stupid things." Ronald Reagan |
|
20th November 2017, 02:53 PM | #25 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 39,057
|
|
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant. |
|
20th November 2017, 02:54 PM | #26 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 39,057
|
Quote:
|
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant. |
|
20th November 2017, 05:07 PM | #27 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,581
|
|
20th November 2017, 05:41 PM | #28 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
20th November 2017, 06:57 PM | #29 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
20th November 2017, 08:13 PM | #30 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
I know you are being sarcastic but at most state universities tuition for foreign students is typically at a much higher non-resident rate than for USA citizens who can establish residency, meaning they would have to pay even higher income taxes.
It is very hard for me to not think that Trump intentionally seeks to destroy the USA as a first world country; virtually all of his policies appear to be directed to that goal. Destroying the next generation of STEM students, and the research they would have produced, is fully in keeping with that. |
20th November 2017, 08:15 PM | #31 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
20th November 2017, 08:24 PM | #32 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
As already posted: virtually all STEM. Probably the largest affected group in numbers will be those in the biological sciences: the majority of whom are doing biomedical-related research. But also large numbers in chemistry, engineering, math, computer sciences, material sciences, etc. They do work for their tuition but the work is related to their research.
But why would we want to encourage them when we can give the tax breaks to golf course owners? |
20th November 2017, 08:27 PM | #33 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
|
20th November 2017, 09:47 PM | #34 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
20th November 2017, 10:39 PM | #35 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
The left did that when?
|
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
21st November 2017, 01:28 AM | #36 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
21st November 2017, 01:45 AM | #37 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,961
|
Yes, this is an Anti-Keynesian stimulus. If anything, now is a time to do something about the fiscal deficits (save now so you have more flexibility for a rainy day later).
I predict another case of Democrats will be left to clean up the mess, just as Bush left with the economy in tatters and Obama had to deal with the aftermath for years afterwards. |
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
21st November 2017, 01:50 AM | #38 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
|
But the Republican approach to economics is so simple. If we have a surplus, cut taxes for the rich because we can afford to. If a deficit, cut taxes for the rich to raise revenue (by some kind of magic.) If the economy is booming, cut taxes for the rich because they deserve it. If the economy is in recession, cut taxes for the rich because they will create jobs (by some kind of magic.)
In short, the answer to every economic and fiscal issue is to cut taxes for the wealthy no matter what. |
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it. |
|
21st November 2017, 01:50 AM | #39 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,961
|
|
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
21st November 2017, 01:56 AM | #40 |
Maledictorian
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,557
|
The reason why the tax cuts will have next to zero positive economic impact is the fact that includes a lot of tax increases, slightly postponed.
No company is going to make major investments in consumer goods when they know that the middle class will have less disposable income in a few years. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|