True Progressivism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

What about them?

As they relate to letting the tax cuts expire?

---

do you think we can afford them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

do you think we can afford them?

---

I already said we couldn't afford the tax cuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I already said we couldn't afford the tax cuts.

---

i'm aware of that. i was referring to free trade and capital flow. what is your postion on them ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Money spent at levels unprecedented in human history (trillions upon trillions on the war on poverty).

Poverty level in U.S. in August of 1964 - ~15%
Poverty level in U.S. today - ~15%

...and down the road we go.

---

That's one reason I say we simply stop the government's war on poverty. We lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

The war on cancer has been going on since 1971. We still do not have a cure for cancer. Should we stop investing in cancer research?

---

At least progress has been made with cancer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

... and there is yet another problem.

What would it have been without the efforts we have made?

---

Probably 15% still...

Have you thought that maybe, just maybe, we have about 15% who are just lazy enough they will do as little as necessary to get by?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Money spent at levels unprecedented in human history (trillions upon trillions on the war on poverty).

Poverty level in U.S. in August of 1964 - ~15%
Poverty level in U.S. today - ~15%

...and down the road we go.

---

This is asinine. You are talking about right before the Great Society was passed and now the shithole that we live in. Poverty rates have risen by over 4% in the last 12 years.

The changes since 2000 have not been an increase in antipoverty measures. No the changes have been giving Boomers better health care, tax cuts while starting wars, and banking deregulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I already said we couldn't afford the tax cuts.

---

Have you ever thought you could afford a tax increase? Ever?

Looks like normal cyclical movement to me, except we had a strong downward trend before we started the war on poverty.

http://www.bizzyblog.com/wp-images/P...h1959-2010.png

I would suggest you keep an open mind to the possibility that people stopped working hard when they had an easy government out.

Open my mind to an asinine ideology from you? i would rather get punched in the nuts.

Hmm trough from 1965 to 1980. Peak from 1980 to 1993 a steep decline from 1993 to 2000 and a steady rise since. Maybe if you think real hard.

this is not hard to figure out. the problem is that neither party as it currently exists provides a solution. You want to go back to 1980 while Dan wants the status quo. Both are shitty responses.

so the stagnation of median earnings, falling wages of less-educated workers, outsourcing, the shift from an industrial society to a financial society, the globalization of labor and declining unionization aren't even considered in the in-depth analysis provided by certain spurs forum self-proclaimed economists? and let's just ignore the fact that the war on poverty helped to increase the income levels of the elderly between 1965-73 because of medicaid, medicare and increase social security benefits.

Maybe the solution is to back off on government assistance, and allow the normal course of events to take place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

so the stagnation of median earnings, falling wages of less-educated workers, outsourcing, the shift from an industrial society to a financial society, the globalization of labor and declining unionization aren't even considered in the in-depth analysis provided by certain spurs forum self-proclaimed economists? and let's just ignore the fact that the war on poverty helped to increase the income levels of the elderly between 1965-73 because of medicaid, medicare and increase social security benefits.

---

It's all cyclic, dummy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

It's all cyclic, dummy!

---

so we'll return to an industrial society with regulations on trade and banks and empower the unions again. okay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

so we'll return to an industrial society with regulations on trade and banks and empower the unions again. okay.

---

We're just going to forget everything we know and start from the industrial revolution again, tbh...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins

Have you ever thought you could afford a tax increase? Ever?

---

If we cant afford the cuts I think I AM arguing for the increase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

so the stagnation of median earnings, falling wages of less-educated workers, outsourcing, the shift from an industrial society to a financial society, the globalization of labor and declining unionization aren't even considered in the in-depth analysis provided by certain spurs forum self-proclaimed economists? and let's just ignore the fact that the war on poverty helped to increase the income levels of the elderly between 1965-73 because of medicaid, medicare and increase social security benefits.

---

I hope you arent talking about me -and if u are please refer to where I ever claimed to be an economist - Im not and I havent.

I brought up the war on poverty simply as a counter argumentvto RGs govt is efficient claim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

If we cant afford the cuts I think I AM arguing for the increase.

---

i didn't ask 'if,' I asked if you have in the past at any point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins

i didn't ask 'if,' I asked if you have in the past at any point.

---

Several times in this forum - yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Probably 15% still...

Have you thought that maybe, just maybe, we have about 15% who are just lazy enough they will do as little as necessary to get by?

---

I know people like that exist. What I do NOT know, is what percentage of the population is that kind of lazy.

Have you thought that maybe, just maybe, the number of people in poverty aren't the same people all the time, work just as hard as everybody else, if not harder, and who just don't have the skills to earn more, is about 15%?

Meh. More trolling attempts. You know you can neither define, nor quantify such things, so you are safe in blathering on with this line of reasoning.

No one is really that smug and insulated.