Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Point economic plan

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1.) replace the income tax (private and corporate) with a flat sales tax
2.) eliminate green backs, to stop sticky wages
3.) eliminate fiat money, and go back to bimetalism
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism
6.) eliminate the payroll, capital gains, and property tax
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 11:54:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism

Can you explain this please? The constitution clearly grants Congress the power to "borrow on the credit of the United States." (Art. I, Sec. 8) How is the deficit unconstitutional? Or did I not understand?
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 1:43:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 11:54:43 AM, Mimshot wrote:
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism

Can you explain this please? The constitution clearly grants Congress the power to "borrow on the credit of the United States." (Art. I, Sec. 8) How is the deficit unconstitutional? Or did I not understand?

1.) didn't say it was.
2.) your describing a debt, not a deficit.

By implementing strict constitutionalism, we create a surplus.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 2:20:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 1:43:00 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/6/2012 11:54:43 AM, Mimshot wrote:
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism

Can you explain this please? The constitution clearly grants Congress the power to "borrow on the credit of the United States." (Art. I, Sec. 8) How is the deficit unconstitutional? Or did I not understand?

1.) didn't say it was.
2.) your describing a debt, not a deficit.


By implementing strict constitutionalism, we create a surplus.

Sorry, I don't understand. The debt is just the sum of all deficits. The deficit for a given year is how much the debt changes that year. A debt thus presupposes a deficit. The Constitution says the Congress can tax, borrow, and spend. I don't see how strict constitutionalism ensures that taxes are greater than spending (the situation we call a surplus).
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes
Starcraftzzz
Posts: 487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 6:23:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
1.) replace the income tax (private and corporate) with a flat sales tax
So slash taxes for millionaires and billionaires in order to increase taxes for those making less than 100,000 by hundreds of percent.
You realize this would result in 40% of Americans being in poverty.
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
2.) eliminate green backs, to stop sticky wages
What? Eliminate the US dollar? How would that stop sticky wages?
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
3.) eliminate fiat money, and go back to bimetalism
Of which the result would be high inflation, massive spels of deflation, longer and deeper recessions
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:43:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 2:20:19 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 1:43:00 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/6/2012 11:54:43 AM, Mimshot wrote:
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism

Can you explain this please? The constitution clearly grants Congress the power to "borrow on the credit of the United States." (Art. I, Sec. 8) How is the deficit unconstitutional? Or did I not understand?

1.) didn't say it was.
2.) your describing a debt, not a deficit.


By implementing strict constitutionalism, we create a surplus.

Sorry, I don't understand. The debt is just the sum of all deficits. The deficit for a given year is how much the debt changes that year. A debt thus presupposes a deficit. The Constitution says the Congress can tax, borrow, and spend. I don't see how strict constitutionalism ensures that taxes are greater than spending (the situation we call a surplus).

By Limitting what the government can spend money on.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:45:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
1.) replace the income tax (private and corporate) with a flat sales tax
2.) eliminate green backs, to stop sticky wages
3.) eliminate fiat money, and go back to bimetalism
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
5.) eliminate the deficit, by implementing strict constitutionalism
6.) eliminate the payroll, capital gains, and property tax

Hey, nice work on the base-6 system, but technically it should be 10 instead of 6.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:48:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 6:23:05 PM, Starcraftzzz wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
1.) replace the income tax (private and corporate) with a flat sales tax
So slash taxes for millionaires and billionaires in order to increase taxes for those making less than 100,000 by hundreds of percent.
You realize this would result in 40% of Americans being in poverty.

Do you know what a sales tax is?

At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
2.) eliminate green backs, to stop sticky wages
What? Eliminate the US dollar? How would that stop sticky wages?
By stopping inflation
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
3.) eliminate fiat money, and go back to bimetalism
Of which the result would be high inflation, massive spels of deflation, longer and deeper recessions
Only if we keep greenbacks
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
Actually min wage causes a rise in unemployment, by messing with the equallinerium.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 1:53:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
Actually min wage causes a rise in unemployment, by messing with the equallinerium.

You've made up a word. Equilibrium would be messed with if there was any change with anything, including any tax changes. The degree of change is important (and the amount of change you're proposing would bend equibrium onto the frat boy bench and get it to take it right up--- let's move on)

But minimum wage has been shown repeatedly by studies to increase employment and decrease poverty at its current rates. I can link you to a study by warwick uni if that would help.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Starcraftzzz
Posts: 487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 11:29:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:48:56 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/6/2012 6:23:05 PM, Starcraftzzz wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
1.) replace the income tax (private and corporate) with a flat sales tax
So slash taxes for millionaires and billionaires in order to increase taxes for those making less than 100,000 by hundreds of percent.
You realize this would result in 40% of Americans being in poverty.

Do you know what a sales tax is?
Yes and the Result of your proposal would eb 40% of Americans living in poverty, and the increase in taxes for those making 100,00 by more than 150% in order to give millionaires millions more


At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
2.) eliminate green backs, to stop sticky wages
What? Eliminate the US dollar? How would that stop sticky wages?
By stopping inflation
Eliminating money doesn't make it easier for wages to decrease/increase
Furthermore inflation isn't a problem

At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
3.) eliminate fiat money, and go back to bimetalism
Of which the result would be high inflation, massive spels of deflation, longer and deeper recessions
Only if we keep greenbacks
when We backed money by gold/silver we had massive swings in inflation and deflation accompanied by massive depressions every 10 years. Every country that was on a gold/silver system the sooner they left the sooner their economies began growing

At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
Actually min wage causes a rise in unemployment, by messing with the equallinerium.
http://www.slate.com...
^Some hidden benefits of minimum wage increases would be a nominal uptick in fast food costs resulting in less fast food consumption and therefore less health care costs

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...-
experts_n_872617.html
http://www.businessweek.com...
^A higher minimum wage that is 40% higher results in employee turnover being almost 400% less.
^Comparable stores that have higher wages saw less turnover and higher productivity and therefor lower costs of labour by a little less than 1/3. Meaning Costco's employees are 30% more productive.

http://www.letjusticeroll.org...
^Unemployment was lowest during times of high minimum wages.

http://www.epinet.org...
^States with higher minimum wages saw 30% more per capita job growth.

http://spreadsheets.google.com...
http://www.dol.gov...
^states with higher minimum wages saw 12% less poverty.

http://www.bls.gov...
http://www.bea.gov...
^Minimum wage increases preceded times with less inflation, less poverty and less unemployment, and more GDP growth.

Minimum wage has decreased even while minimum wage workers qualifications and productivity has increased.
Minimum wage has decreased by 20%.
Education attainment of minimum wage workers has increased by 50% and Workers productivity has increased by 45%
^http://www.epi.org...
http://www.seiu.org...

http://thinkprogress.org...
^Minimum wage increase in New Jersey followed more job growth then neighboring Pennsylvania who didn't see an increase in minimum wage. In 2009 the minimum wage increase boosted consumer spending and therefor demand by 5 billion.

http://www.reuters.com...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
^A minimum wage increase would act similar to unemployment benefits and food stamps providing billions of stimulus and demand to the economy a dollar increase in the federal minimum wage would increase output by 10 billion dollars while simultaneously expanding living standards for the poorest Americans.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 4:28:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 1:53:42 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
Actually min wage causes a rise in unemployment, by messing with the equallinerium.

You've made up a word. Equilibrium would be messed with if there was any change with anything, including any tax changes.

It was a typo. By mandating a price floor above the equilibrium wage, you cause an increase in unemployment.

The degree of change is important (and the amount of change you're proposing would bend equibrium onto the frat boy bench and get it to take it right up--- let's move on)


It's not change, it's sticky economics that hurt the economy

But minimum wage has been shown repeatedly by studies to increase employment and decrease poverty at its current rates. I can link you to a study by warwick uni if that would help.

Obviously you never took a economics course.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 4:35:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 4:28:16 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/7/2012 1:53:42 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:16:54 AM, DanT wrote:
4.) lower minimum wage, to increase employment
Of which all the data shows that the minimum wage is beneficial to the economy
Actually min wage causes a rise in unemployment, by messing with the equallinerium.

You've made up a word. Equilibrium would be messed with if there was any change with anything, including any tax changes.

It was a typo. By mandating a price floor above the equilibrium wage, you cause an increase in unemployment.

...
Obviously you never took a economics course.

This is true in the short run. Do you have evidence that in the long run? Those newly higher paid workers go out and buy more stuff which other firms need to hire more people to produce. It seems to me the issue is whether, based on the elasticity of the current labor demand curve, the price floor will increase or decrease total payroll. If it's an increase, why shouldn't unemployment fall due to secondary spending?
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes