Bill Maher Rips Republicans Over California’s Booming Economy

#127
#127
apevol said:
Doesn't matter. They also pay taxes in every state they play a game in
Click to expand...

Don't forget city income taxes too. CA is almost but not as bad as NY. NY says if you work for a single day your employer should withhold and remit state income tax. That would require you to file a return to get your money back. The hope being of course C suite officers won't file and they just keep all those "little" deposits

Look up any ranking and CA will be top 3 for most unfriendly business environments. The amount of rules and regulations is astounding. There are lots of companies that avoid it completely.
 
#128
#128
Persian Vol said:
To each their own, but I think if you have the money to afford a nice home in California, I think it is totally worth it. Having a home with a mountaintop view overlooking a city is absolutely breathtaking. Not to mention the perfect weather year round.
Click to expand...

With enough money you can live happily almost anywhere.
 
#131
#131
SuperDave said:
dont-laugh-you-still-believe-in-trickle-down-economics-kid-mailing-letter-to-santa-at-the-north-pole-1450887698.jpg
Click to expand...

just ignorant, just dumb
 
#132
#132
NorCalVol67 said:
This is correct. The turnaround in California's economy under Jerry Brown has been remarkable. The state had massive debt when he came into office and he angered a lot of people with massive budget cuts. He got the debt under control and actually turned it into a surplus with a booming economy.
Click to expand...

so brown acted like a republican by cutting government spending. the fact is with millions more illegals coming to california, the weight of welfare those illegals will put Cal back in debt and the wage earnings will continue to leave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#135
#135
samanderson said:
What I find hilarious is conservatives have been taken out behind the house and given an ass whipping in this thread. AND THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW IT!!! :birgits_giggle: I guess that's what happens after kneeling at the alter of simplicity 24/7.
Click to expand...

Not much of an ass whippin then is it? Probably more like a liberal spanking with a feather duster.
 
#136
#136
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#137
#137
dduncan4163 said:
Bill nails it. Trickle down does not work. Never has and never will
Click to expand...

Trickle-down: socialist code word for preventing government from taking money away from the people who actually earned it.

Had to happen sometime. The groupies of the Venezuelan School of Economics had to find a new home. This one is a strange one for them to praise.

So after a decade of Keynesian economic policies on steroids, a time marked by massive increases in government control, intervention, and regulation of the private economy, the best you can produce is an economy that is in part a patent rejection of Keynes?

Nice to see the Chavistas on this forum accept the fact that jacked-up government spending has failed.

The Jerry Brown of 2016 is not the Jerry Brown of 1983. He hasn't rejected the kind of high-tax/high-regulation economy you support. But he has moved well away from meth-head government spending of the kind you advocate.

Gov. Jerry Brown urges fiscal restraint in State of State speech - San Jose Mercury News

Quoting economists at the state Department of Finance, Brown said the next recession, even if it were only of average intensity, would cut California's revenues by $55 billion over three years. And that, he said, is why it's "imperative" to build up the rainy day fund and invest temporary surpluses in ways that won't lock in future spending.

"California has a very progressive but volatile income tax," Brown said. "If we are to minimize the zigzag of spend-cut-spend that this tax system inevitably produces, we must build a very large reserve."
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound like Obamanomics to me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#138
#138
Speaking of Fearless Leader, why weren't you (and Maher for that matter) heaping praise on the national economy?

10 Charts Which Show We Are Much Worse Off Than Just Before The Last Economic Crisis

Presentation-Labor-Force-Participation-Rate-425x282.png


Presentation-Real-Median-Household-Income-425x282.png


Why? Because the socialist economic model has failed to produce the results promised.

Now let us compare the reformed economy of the 1980s, the one influenced by Milton Friedman, to the failed socialist model of Obama in the present:

gdp-test.jpg


gdp-test.jpg


You are right: trickle-down never worked. That is...trickle down government never worked.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#140
#140
T.N. Buckingham said:
Speaking of Fearless Leader, why weren't you (and Maher for that matter) heaping praise on the national economy?

10 Charts Which Show We Are Much Worse Off Than Just Before The Last Economic Crisis

Presentation-Labor-Force-Participation-Rate-425x282.png


Presentation-Real-Median-Household-Income-425x282.png


Why? Because the socialist economic model has failed to produce the results promised.

Now let us compare the reformed economy of the 1980s, the one influenced by Milton Friedman, to the failed socialist model of Obama in the present:

gdp-test.jpg


gdp-test.jpg


You are right: trickle-down never worked. That is...trickle down government never worked.
Click to expand...

f_1192bfa689.jpg
 
#143
#143
SuperDave said:
f_1192bfa689.jpg
Click to expand...

Interesting selection there SD. The economy is strong because the stock market has performed in strong fashion.
If it has failed to reach everyone, then this is somehow proof that "trickle down" is a failure.

When and where has Obama implemented any of the economic strategies of the 1980s that would prove your meme correct?

I'll help you out here. Why is the stock market doing so well? Because the Federal Reserve has primed the investment pump using quantitative easing:

Obama’s $4 trillion gift to the rich | New York Post

There’s one more thing that QE accomplished: it has made the stock market soar. Interest rates have remained so low for so long that investors have had no other choice but to move their money into the stock market, thus creating a bubble.

Even those adverse to risk were forced to chase the better yields in stocks, no matter how dangerous that was.

But for every winner in QE there are 99 losers. While the richest 1% of the US population has been loving the rise in stock prices and other QE amenities, Fed policy has been taxing on the masses of savers.
Click to expand...

The fiscal policies embraced by Obama, Bernanke, Krugman, and the other Keynesian clowns have made those involved with Obama's crony government very wealthy. But everyone else has suffered as the economy has been destroyed by government control and regulation.

State of the Union: Obama's Economy in 7 Charts - Fortune

And despite the populist wave that propelled Obama to the White House in 2008, the president should steer clear of the inequality discussion on Tuesday night, since from 2009 through 2014, the über rich have experienced impressive real income growth, while the bottom 99% has seen almost none.
Click to expand...

Yes SuperDave: trickle down government has failed everyone but those who are either in government or who have bought off the government.

Warren Buffet and George Soros are happy. The rest of us are getting screwed in an economy for the crony, by the crony, and of the crony.
 
#144
#144
T.N. Buckingham said:
Interesting selection there SD. The economy is strong because the stock market has performed in strong fashion.
If it has failed to reach everyone, then this is somehow proof that "trickle down" is a failure.

When and where has Obama implemented any of the economic strategies of the 1980s that would prove your meme correct?

I'll help you out here. Why is the stock market doing so well? Because the Federal Reserve has primed the investment pump using quantitative easing:

Obama’s $4 trillion gift to the rich | New York Post



The fiscal policies embraced by Obama, Bernanke, Krugman, and the other Keynesian clowns have made those involved with Obama's crony government very wealthy. But everyone else has suffered as the economy has been destroyed by government control and regulation.

State of the Union: Obama's Economy in 7 Charts - Fortune



Yes SuperDave: trickle down government has failed everyone but those who are either in government or who have bought off the government.

Warren Buffet and George Soros are happy. The rest of us are getting screwed in an economy for the crony, by the crony, and of the crony.
Click to expand...

That's the rich.. they don't trickle down anything.. never have.. never will. I know this.. I lived it.. I have seen it in operation for 42 years. Giving rich people tax cuts does one thing.. makes them richer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#146
#146
SuperDave said:
That's the rich.. they don't trickle down anything.. never have.. never will. I know this.. I lived it.. I have seen it in operation for 42 years. Giving rich people tax cuts does one thing.. makes them richer.
Click to expand...

Taxing them more doesn't make poor people richer
 
#147
#147
SuperDave said:
That's the rich.. they don't trickle down anything.. never have.. never will. I know this.. I lived it.. I have seen it in operation for 42 years. Giving rich people tax cuts does one thing.. makes them richer.
Click to expand...

Yep...you can't tell me how the failure of Keynesianism on steroids in the present is somehow the fault of Reagan economic policies in the 1980s.

Giving everyone tax cuts allows them to keep more of the money they earned. It allows them more options in their personal economic decisions. The rich benefit. But so too does everyone else. Because instead of investing solely into the stock market, the wealthy invest their money into the economy. That creates opportunity and wealth for those who are hired in a growing economy that truly benefits everyone.

http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa261.pdf

During the Reagan years, the total share of national income tilted toward the wealthiest Americans. From 1980 to 1988
the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans increased their share of total income from 16.5 to 18.3 while the poorest fifth saw their share fall from 4.2 to 3.8 percent. [49]

Yet it is not true that the gains by the wealthiest Americans came at the expense of low-income Americans.
From 1981 to 1989, every income quintile--from the richest to the poorest--gained income according to the Census Bureau economic data (see Figure 11). [50] The reason the wealthiest Americans saw their share of total income rise is that they gained income at a faster pace than did the middle class and the poor. But Reaganomics did create a rising tide that lifted nearly all boats.

Table 8 shows that by 1989 there were 5.9 million more Americans whose salaries exceeded $50,000 a year than there were in 1981 (adjusting for inflation). Similarly, there were 2.5 million more Americans earning more than $75,000 a year, an 83 percent increase. And the number of Americans earning less than $10,000 a year fell by 3.4 million workers.
Click to expand...

Giving the individual more control over money they earn, whether they are at the top or bottom of the earnings market, actually works.

If you don't believe that, then I can always provide an economic comparison between Libertarian-inspired Chile and "Socialist Paradise" Venezuela. But I strongly suspect you will not wish to go there.
 
#148
#148
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top