So you agree that taxes being cut do stimulate the economy, but disagree with who got the pie? I probably agree with that.
Sure, tax cuts can be stimulative...Laffer Curve would teach us that. We just have to make sure to keep equilibrium.
I hope he is trying to stimulate industrial growth, here in Chicago we depend on it manufacturing as the basis of our economy more than most large cities.
Actually, manufacturing jobs have been hit harder than programmers.
Imagine if Clinton had tried to mute the boom. The howls from the pundits would have been deafening. In hindsight, accounting standards should have been better enforced.
It's a no-brainer what Bush should have done. It's a demand-side problem, a demand-side problem deserves a demand-side solution. Tax-cuts geared towards consumers would have made far more sense than capital gains guts and dividend taxes reduced. Creating demand should have been the goal.
Bush should have cuts taxes significantly towards middle and lower income earners. We haven't been facing a problem with productivity and companies have a glut of infrastructure. Companies didn't need more money to invest in growth, they needed to get people and companies to buy more of their products and services.
Uh, presidents don't control the economy but can influence the bone-crushing depths of a recession through sound fiscal, policy and social initiatives. Bush is a one trick pony i.e tax cuts.
Clinton didn't create the boom nor did they create the bomb, they did do what they thought would create a favorable climate for an emerging Internet-enabled economy.
My life taught me that but my fiancee went to law school and graduated in to the worst econmy in ten years and makes as much as I do and her debt is KILLING us. Once we get it stabilized, that's it! But a lot of people are in debt for reasons other than 'big eyes'.
When wages go down, so can prices.
But debt doesn't go down. Right now in America, we have the most debt-laden society we have ever had and the cost of college tuition is making higher education unattainable for many and the cost of providing health care to employees is killing companies. So if you get out of college in debt and suddenly wages go down and prices go down, you're still stuck with debt which is now inproportionate to what you make in wages.
People you called overpaid are also more likely o have higher debt due to the cost and related cost of education.
Also, as a country we provide regulations that protect workers while the countries we are "competing" with don't and in India's case they subsidize the hell out of certain educational tracks.
Sorry, but stating that eventually it will work out doesn't necessarlity make the deterministic prediction true.
What I think they are really hoping for is to scare people away from Linux altogether. Interesting how they want the entire license fee for something that contains a fraction of their software.
I remember hearing one thoery of the fall of Rome was that by making an interconnected system of roads allowed the barbarians to come in and slowly eat away at Romes military. Never did try and fact check that assertion though.
Re:Governments embody greed
on
Saving the Net
·
· Score: 1
Okay but who gives goverment the guns?? Who holds them. That's right! Citizens. And personally, I've never had my taxes collected at gunpoint usually the HR IS systems deducts the money for various taxes and deposits the rest in to my bank account. Where the hell do you live that they collect taxes that way?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh no! Just saying if we cut too much we won't be stimulating jack.
So you agree that taxes being cut do stimulate the economy, but disagree with who got the pie? I probably agree with that.
Sure, tax cuts can be stimulative...Laffer Curve would teach us that. We just have to make sure to keep equilibrium.
I hope he is trying to stimulate industrial growth, here in Chicago we depend on it manufacturing as the basis of our economy more than most large cities.
Actually, manufacturing jobs have been hit harder than programmers. Imagine if Clinton had tried to mute the boom. The howls from the pundits would have been deafening. In hindsight, accounting standards should have been better enforced. It's a no-brainer what Bush should have done. It's a demand-side problem, a demand-side problem deserves a demand-side solution. Tax-cuts geared towards consumers would have made far more sense than capital gains guts and dividend taxes reduced. Creating demand should have been the goal. Bush should have cuts taxes significantly towards middle and lower income earners. We haven't been facing a problem with productivity and companies have a glut of infrastructure. Companies didn't need more money to invest in growth, they needed to get people and companies to buy more of their products and services.
Things are bad all over the globe, would this rationalize liberating people from cruel dictators the world over??
Uh, presidents don't control the economy but can influence the bone-crushing depths of a recession through sound fiscal, policy and social initiatives. Bush is a one trick pony i.e tax cuts. Clinton didn't create the boom nor did they create the bomb, they did do what they thought would create a favorable climate for an emerging Internet-enabled economy.
My life taught me that but my fiancee went to law school and graduated in to the worst econmy in ten years and makes as much as I do and her debt is KILLING us. Once we get it stabilized, that's it! But a lot of people are in debt for reasons other than 'big eyes'.
When wages go down, so can prices. But debt doesn't go down. Right now in America, we have the most debt-laden society we have ever had and the cost of college tuition is making higher education unattainable for many and the cost of providing health care to employees is killing companies. So if you get out of college in debt and suddenly wages go down and prices go down, you're still stuck with debt which is now inproportionate to what you make in wages. People you called overpaid are also more likely o have higher debt due to the cost and related cost of education. Also, as a country we provide regulations that protect workers while the countries we are "competing" with don't and in India's case they subsidize the hell out of certain educational tracks. Sorry, but stating that eventually it will work out doesn't necessarlity make the deterministic prediction true.
Uh, what's a news-agency?
What I think they are really hoping for is to scare people away from Linux altogether. Interesting how they want the entire license fee for something that contains a fraction of their software.
utopia literally means nowhere for a reason. It can't exist.
I remember hearing one thoery of the fall of Rome was that by making an interconnected system of roads allowed the barbarians to come in and slowly eat away at Romes military. Never did try and fact check that assertion though.
Okay but who gives goverment the guns?? Who holds them. That's right! Citizens. And personally, I've never had my taxes collected at gunpoint usually the HR IS systems deducts the money for various taxes and deposits the rest in to my bank account. Where the hell do you live that they collect taxes that way?
No! Bad, bad idea. I think the less we fsck with the Constitution the better.