- Posts: 7163
- Thank you received: 21
Farm Bill Fails in the House
21 Jun 2013 07:44 #23
by Reverend Revelant
Thank you for all your help
Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD
Replied by Reverend Revelant on topic Farm Bill Fails in the House
FredHayek wrote:
Walter L Newton wrote:
FredHayek wrote: ...none are as blind as those who will not see?
Then why the hell didn't you clip and paste the article I linked to so she can see it?
Because it is more funny this way. Like her standing below a giant neon sign and she refuses to look up to see where she is.
Thank you for all your help
Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 Jun 2013 18:00 #24
by The Boss
Replied by The Boss on topic Farm Bill Fails in the House
LadyJazzer wrote:
on that note wrote: LJ,
Since you just provide graphs without any causal statistics....
Since 1979 social services, in fact all govt services have increased a great deal. As you often point out, we all use these services, but especially those in lower income brackets (they get and use more welfares, unemployment, schoolings, etc.).
As much of these are funded my higher income brackets, wouldn't such a representation of incomes over times produce similar curves even if what I describe above was the only factor? Lower income people would need less income (inflation adjusted) to be the same as they were in 1979 because they get more from the govt they used to be on their own for and Higher income people would have to have increases in pay (perhaps not this much) to cover the increases in tax burden being thrust upon them to pay for those in need (lower income brackets). In fact, since there are far fewer people in the 1% (thus why we refer to them as just 1%) in order to cover their immense share of the taxes (immense relative to their % of the population), any little increase in govt services, or cost, would have to hit them very hard and would have to result in a much larger increase in income in order to not loose ground.
Given this, I accept that there are many, many things at play in your graph and this is why the graph, without an educated analysis of the causes, is somewhat useless.
Do you have an opinion of the benefits of social programs and the need to pay for them? The only way to produce a graph that is different is to tax the poor people more to pay for their programs and then justify market based pay increases to compensate....or to actually show the causal analysis.
In addition, most such trends are exponential in nature (remember, the % religion), and all exponential graphs look like that. If one group goes up even slightly as a % and the other goes down, then after enough cycles, the graph will look as you show. Simply an increase in the size of govt (like we had under Reagan or others since) will produce such a graph under any current set of policies or most that many are proposing aside from more price controls (like capping income, etc.), unless you want to increases taxes on the poor more than the rich.
Are those incomes pre or post tax? That really matters.
Thoughts on this?
I also agree the economy is doing better for those that already had jobs, those that work for the govt, those that have large businesses, those are relatively wealthy and those that have lots of assets....but those are not the ones that we are messing with the economy for....at least I thought it was for the unemployed, uneducated, unskilled and generally unable. They are not doing better on average, at least from my perspective. You of all people should not use these economic indicaters that measure the rich as indicator of how we are all doing. It's time to face it, our govt created a crash and now they are doing everything they can to fix it, by keeping us there. Can you find a market crash that lasts 5-10 years when the govt was not in control. We are living in bad times for most, and to claim otherwise or to think rich folks or cubical workers are a measure of America ain't helping. The Nile is a river.
Aren't more people on food stamps because the govt artificially crashed the economy and then kept it down by not letting us fix it? Regardless of who was in office, they are running the economy not us, as long as it is them, we will crash and or return to a crash.
Thanks for playing....if you do. By the way, it is no game, it is guns and time and opportunity...or lack there of.
LadyJazzer wrote:
FredHayek wrote: 1) Bernanke says the economy is doing better and is slowing QE.
2) Sequestration, remember that?
3) Food Stamps have increased exponenetially, time to pull back?
4) Unemployment rate has started to fall according to Team Obama, less need for food assistance.
And consider this, why are food stamps part of the farm bill? Time to vote on those seperately.
1) So you admit that the economy is doing better... Good...It's about time.
Why, yes, the economy HAS improved...Mostly for the top 1-2%:
The bottom 50+ % ... Not so much.... Imagine my surprise...
2) Sequestration?...Why yes, I remember that... The cuts in programs for HeadStart, Hot-lunch programs, Hot-meals-for-Seniors, is what is causing the jump in food-stamp assistance requests... TeaBaggers taking away with the Right hand, and then realizing they should take away with the left hand too, since they haven't done enough damage to the 47%.
3) Food Stamps have increased [sic] exponenetially, time to pull back?...
NO... (I think you mean "exponentially"...) Since it's the cuts in all of the other unemployment-benefits, and cuts to other social safety-net programs that has caused the increase, the TeaLiban shouldn't cry "It's time to cut more."
4) For those who have found jobs and no longer qualify for food-assistance, that's great... For people, (like Wal-Mart 'screwees') who are working, but still fall under the poverty line for food assistance, and for those like seniors, children, disabled, and veterans on disability who CAN'T work, it's still necessary, and this is nothing more than the usual Randroid/Libertarian/sociopathic punitive-punishment knee-jerk reaction...
But thanks for playing.
My thoughts on this are:
1) The graphs are clearly marked already as to what is "pre-tax" and "post-tax"...Your reading comprehension, or lack thereof, is not my problem.
Sorry I missed this, my bad.
2) The source of the graphs is the Congressional Budget Office. Since Fred never provides any sources for his hyperbole and empty rhetoric, and I HAVE provided sources, I suggest you take the time to do your own research on them. That's not my responsibility.
I did not ask for a source, I trusted the data. I asked for the interpretation of the causes so people don't take the data a run amok, you or me. Did someone take more time and skill than your or I and say "what does this mean". That is why I pointed out that our current policy of taxation and social services demands that graph form regardless of other variables. Again, I accept the graph as fact for the sake of this discussion.
3) Our GOVERNMENT is the one that is digging us out of the mess caused by 8 years of failed Bush policy that CAUSED IT, and teabagger obstructionism that started the day Obama took his first oath of office...In spite of them--not because of them--it is turning around. (And I thank Fred for admitting that the economy is improving...IN SPITE of the teabaggers.)
I agree the previous govt agents caused it, much of the failed economy is being perpetuated by states and local govts putting endless barriers to employer keeping and creating jobs. I agree the fed is doing a lot to try and help the general economy, very large very debatable things, perhaps they will have a net positive effect, but I see little to no help from local govts and encourage employers aside from themselves. I see many barriers and employ despite much local discouragement from the govt. The only thing the fed has done much worse to me, aside from starting the crash with bad lending laws, is make me deposit employee witholding and SS on the internet, I would have preferred to keep paying at my bank which would have been happy to keep processing it for me.
I don't see the teaparty as being a major influence on anything anymore, I am not sure why you are focused on it.
4) There are more people on food-stamps because the TeaPublicans have done everything they can to ensure that the rich get richer, and the folks that they have put out of work, and whose jobs they have outsourced, and whose unemployment benefits they continue to cut, NEED IT.
LJ, they are on food stamps because there are so many hurdles and liablitilies to guys like me hiring that we only do it if we absolutely need to and only the best of people because of the extra govt consequences for giving people a chance. They are on food stamps because we will not enforce our min wage/worker laws on companies that import products (or drop ours, which wont happen). We set up the board game to loose, now we are loosing.
"Aren't more people on food stamps because the govt artificially crashed the economy and then kept it down by not letting us fix it? "
No, more people are on food stamps because the Bush administration caused the biggest recession since the Great Depression and crashed the economy BEFORE handing the keys to Obama, and then the teabaggers kept it down by doing everything possible to obstruct the policies that WOULD have fixed it. Nice try...But that dog won't hunt.
I am ready to fix it everyday, starting new companies, adding value to products people want, but not doing as much as I could because of so many barriers, I have listed them many times. I cannot go more then 8 days without filling out govt forms, paying portions or signing my life away that everyone of these is true and accurate. Employers are told by the govt policies to only employ if absolutely needed and only the best of people, don't try the unskilled or unproven, perhaps even unemployed.
Again, I don't even see these teaparty people in the news, you seem to be the only one following them.
What specific policies by the fed would get me to hire more people? Again, it is the states and the locals that kill most of the jobs.
5) The continual whine that "the most critical thing facing America is the "debt" and the "deficit" has been proven to be bull-puckey....
Did I go on about the debt in this thread or much at all. I would like to pay it down, but I thought we were talking about jobs, taxes and I brought in social services. I guess now that you bring it up, if we carry a lot of debt, in stead of not taxing or paying for your programs, we can pay interest. But again, I don't thing I stressed this as a big deal in my graph comments.
Thanks for playing.
And thank you, a little abrasive, but I enjoy the back and forth and your answers. This is what I have generally been seeking on this site, not agreement, but a conversation. I would accept agreement though :happier:
(Poor Fred...Still can't fight his own battles...)
I was not fighting for him, just to understand and point out again that the graph is a reflection of the policies from my analysis, it looks like that if you tax the rich more and the poor use more program services.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.140 seconds
sponsors
