Friendly reminder that trickle down economics is not a thing, and that it's a shitty political term used by left wingers (who have actually convinced themselves that it actually exists) to attack anything remotely pro-market (that they don't advocate for at the current time)
Communism has also been proven effective in small groups.
The problem is, just like with communism the whole premise of the theory breaks down because that's not actual how people behave in the free market. It's a pipe dream.
It's not real, it's a strawman. Seriously. I have no doubt in my mind some lefty economic professor taught it believing that it's actually advocated for by the right, but it's not.
Where do you think the government's spending goes? Look up MPC and the income multiplier. Tax cuts for the rich are much more likely to go towards hookers and blow than food stamps.
Hookers and blow are consumption. And while MPC has the multiplier effect, the reverse side is MPS. Saving = investments. And in the long run the economy can only grow with investments.
Hookers and blow are goods being consumed thus injecting money back into the economy, your argument is less you're angry at tax breaks for the rich and more that you don't like where the rich spend their money because it doesn't directly benefit you and your ideals.
Those poor, poor limousine liberals and their paltry 200k per year. If they get taxed much more they might even have to move out of their ivory towers.
In fairness, you do get a lot of shit for free just living in Sweden. I'm not sure it's worth the tradeoff, but it's a legitimate choice.
Democrats in this country want a similar level of taxation, but instead of actual healthcare and free college, they're just going to force you to buy the same shitty healthcare you've already rejected (because it's expensive and won't cover anything), and want to send you to SJW factories instead of giving you a real education.
It actually depends on the person. If you don't like working and getting free shit then it is the best place. But if you are workaholic and alcoholic then it is the shittiest.
Democrats never seem to mention that "free college" in Europe usually means "free, assuming your grades and test scores are high enough or else enjoy your lovely career in the trades college."
There's not a single quality European uni outwith CH and the UK. Not one. Fucking Singapore alone has more top-tier unis than your entire dying continent.
Come to grips with the fact your entire castrated continent and civilisation hasn't been relevant since Hitler. Then kill yourself while listening to insufferable dance music.
Fucking Singapore has more top-tier unis than the whole of the non-UK EU. Cry harder that your entire civilisation hasn't been relevant since Hitler, eurocuck.
ooh, nice goalpost moving. Heads up, dude, most people don't go to Harvard or Yale, they go to shitty scum-tier colleges in rural Ohio or whatever. Still, you're probably still 16 or something, so keep up the good work and I'm sure with your insight and broad knowledge you'll find out for yourself. If you're lucky.
I got into a pretty nice college with grades so bad it was actually kind of funny. What they're really looking for is someone who will consistently pay them lots of money and probably not detonate a bomb during class one day. A 4.0 is more an indicator that you take education seriously enough to not default on your loan than anything.
What's wrong with that? If you don't cut it you shouldn't be able to take a spot from somebody smarter than you just because your family has money or influence.
In Norway at least, people with shit grades are allowed to try to improve them anyway, but they have to pay for it themselves because they screwed it up the first time. The cost is about $100 per subject (used to be $50, but then a lot of people didn't show up for the exam.).
I don't think there is anything wrong with that. I'm merely pointing out that the "free college just like Europe" crowd here tends to gloss over the "for qualified students only" bit.
Oh. Then its worth mentioning that if you drop out or fail your classes you have to pay back 100% of your student loans (like 15k yearly for living expenses at government run institutions, and added tuition if you go to a private one) instead of like 65% if you pass. Higher education here is pretty ok, but if you go just to fuck around it will cost you a bit.
This is more or less the same situation we face now. Not anyone can just roll into the state schools anymore. Applying to college has gotten insanely competitive.
If you itemize your tax returns, most Americans won't have much sympathy for you.
Understand that as a result of Obama's shitty handling of the 2007 crash, the most common wage in America is about 25k a year. More than 50% of Americans make that, or less. That's the issue with inequality--to over 50% of America, you're still 'the rich'.
Honestly, it's only going to go up. You've got three options: disenfranchise, actual work on income inequality, or slowly watch your country descend into communism. The first will probably cause a lot of terrorism in a country where mass shootings are already common (largely due to the social anomie caused by men unable to earn enough to attract a wife or have a valid place in society. The second will cause real political reforms, as the current system encourages nothing but obeying the wealthy until the entire thing explodes. And the third...well, honestly, that's where we're going. Communism wasn't actually considered a 'big thing' 10-20 years ago like it is now, and the 2007 crash (or more accurately, this political systems complete refusal to respond to it) is largely responsible for that
People who unironically think they're smarter than GWB while having accomplished nothing in their pathetic lives should neck themselves. Dude made some decisions I don't like but he's genuinely probably smarter than both of us combined.
According to factcheck.org, if you're taking the SALT deduction, you're probably "rich enough."
Higher-income households are more likely to itemize, so they are more likely to claim the [SALT] deduction. “About 10 percent of tax filers with incomes less than $50,000 claimed the SALT deduction in 2014, compared with about 81 percent of tax filers with incomes exceeding $100,000,” the Tax Policy Center says in a brief on the topic.
Yes but you might get more from the new standard deduction and other changes. Im not a fan of the plan, just trying to figure out how to calculate all this shit.
I won't. My itemized deductions are higher, still.
In general I wouldn't mind it that much except for the fact that if I knew this was coming, I might have held off on buying a house. I budgeted things out a certain way expecting certain deductions and that benefit is getting reduced quite a bit.
Have a feeling property values will go down because of this, as well.
not when those taxes are going to subsidize those making over 500,000 and to repeal the estate tax.
This tax bill is not about workers. It is about giving shareholders and businesses lower taxes and merely hoping benefits will trickle down. We have seen this play out again and again, showing that this type of policy does not work.
Also, isn't wealth transfer anathema to republicans? Also, their is so much pork in this thing it is disgusting. They are literally writing in the margins of the bill. One thing I can tell you definitively is that corporations will win, and the american public, especially future generations (or even when you are going to retire) are going to get fucked.
Nothing expressed in that bullshit opinion takes away from the fact that a bunch of rich people screaming "eat the rich" are bitching about about being put on the menu.
To be blunt, I really have no sympathy for someone in the top three percent of household income shitting on the top one percent for being "too rich."
Also, the left has never accepted "I don't like what my tax dollars are being used for" whenever they are raising taxes. As far as I'm concerned, this is yet another case of
"B-b-but it's different when we do it"
that has become the hallmark of the American left.
You're missing the part where rich people making over $200k in red states are getting a tax cut, but people making over $200k in California or New York are getting a tax hike. It's legislation finely tuned to hurt Democrat voters only.
You're missing the part where red states aren't taxing the fuck out of their residents, and blue states are. If you are going to see your tax burden spike if the SALT deduction goes away, it's because your state and local governments need to lower their taxes.
You're missing the part where red states aren't taxing the fuck out of their residents
Texas does, it's a red state with high taxes - property taxes. But conveniently, the GOP tax bill still allows property taxes to be deducted. So that Texas, a GOP state can benefit. Because the head of the GOP controlled House Ways and Means committee is from Texas, a red state.
Which proves this isn't some principled change in tax policy, it's weaponization of the tax code against blue states.
Then those cucks need to write their state and tell them to lower taxes. How the fuck is it you think republicans are responsible for high as fuck state taxes? Are you retarded or just LARPing as one
Nah, the old rules were fine - they allowed states to fund their infrastructure without drastically raising the tax burden of the population.
And in the end, states like NY and CA - some of the losers in this bill, are some of the few that actually pain into the system instead of useless leech red states that gloat about low taxes, while taking handouts to stay alive.
How the fuck is it you think republicans are responsible for high as fuck state taxes?
Texas is a red state with high taxes - property taxes. But conveniently, the GOP tax bill still allows property taxes to be deducted. So that Texas, a red state can benefit. Because the head of the GOP controlled House Ways and Means committee represents Texas, a red state.
Which proves this isn't some principled change in tax policy, it's weaponization of the tax code against blue states.
$200k is middle class in my area, that's a working professional's wage, usually with a high cost of living to go with it. Most people here are ok with paying more taxes, and redistributive policies in general. They aren't ok paying more taxes to offset a tax cut for the super wealthy, and those of equal earners in other states. You don't need to pretend that's the same thing, or that it's somehow weird that people feel this way.
As for local taxes being the problem - well, that is generally how you build a state that actually produces more than it takes in. Even with the deductions - states like NY and CA were carrying the rest of you leeches.
Yeah that's how it works bwahaha. Jesus, you'd make a shit viking. There are whole towns around here where the median home price is well north of four mil, and you want to raid mid-grade techies with no assets to speak of.
200k is middle class everywhere in America but you're still going to be considered rich by the jobless liberal arts majors calling for higher taxes. You can try to reason with them and tell them you couldn't even afford the townhouse with the terrace and your Mercedes doesn't have massaging seats but they aren't going to listen to you.
First of all, the guy making 160k is 20% lower than the 200k in your comment.
He's also just scraping by.
I'm assuming SF is actually your area, then, based on your reply. The median salary in SF is $77k/year. How can you qualify a salary that's 2.6x the median as middle class? It isn't Oprah rich, but it isn't middle class. It's obtuse to think so.
That's because you don't understand how people live in SF. The median wage being what it is, and it's basic incompatibility with the cost of living in the area, is a problem. Some, view it as a crisis.
Another study, by Attom Data Solutions in January, calculated that renters in the Marin County/San Francisco metro area will spend more than 77 percent of their salary, on average, to pay rent in 2017. The national average is 38.7 percent.
People are dogpiling into apartments - but that is not a middle class existence.
Realistically, to not live in a shithole in SF, you need to be making well over 100k - and at that point you're likely to be still be sharing an apt. 200k is not the bare-minimum to have a middle class lifestyle in SF, but it's nowhere near enough to be wealthy. Everyone who makes 200k in SF, or Bay Area in general, is very much middle class.
Because again, if you define it by requiring a 2 BR in city center then we're past the discussion of middle class.
If you can't afford a decent 3br in a building that isn't falling apart, you're not wealthy. You might not be poor, but you sure as shit haven't climbed out of middle class yet.
The guy in the bottom is worth 2.3 billion and he made an app that connects to your Fitbit and sends you a funny gif every time your heart rates rockets above 150 from panic attacks.
You're both fucking retarded. The smart move would just be to print more money until the debt is gone. The US has the capability of printing hundreds of thousands of dollars per day: if it wasnt for the Jewish elite restricting money production we would all be rich.
Recessions and recoveries occur naturally in our economy.
The economic cycle is: upturn, downturn, recovery, and depression. It's a naturally occurring cycle. What you DON'T do is bail out too big to fail banks and businesses like Obama did. We almost universally agree that this was a horrible decision.
It's another non-statement. Deaths occur naturally among human populations. This statement is of virtually no use to anyone. Likewise is the assertion that economic health is sinusoidal. What matters is the nature of these variations and their context.
In your original comment you spat out a non-statement to introduce your tangential opinion about the Economic Stabilization Act. It was the verbal equivalent of you fucking up a slight of hand.
What the darn-diddily-doodily did you just say about me, you little witcharooney? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class at Springfield Bible College, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret mission trips in Capital City, and I have over 300 confirmed baptisms. I am trained in the Old Testament and I’m the top converter in the entire church mission group. You are nothing to me but just another heathen. I will cast your sins out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before in Heaven, mark my diddily-iddilly words. You think you can get away with saying that blasphemy to me over the Internet? Think again, friendarino. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of evangelists across Springfield and your IP is being traced by God right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggorino. The storm that wipes out the diddily little thing you call your life of sin. You’re going to Church, kiddily-widdily. Jesus can be anywhere, anytime, and he can turn you to the Gospel in over infinity ways, and that’s just with his bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in preaching to nonbelievers, but I have access to the entire dang- diddily Bible collection of the Springfield Bible College and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your sins away off the face of the continent, you diddily-doo satan-worshipper. If only you could have known what holy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you from the Heavens, maybe you would have held your darn-diddily-fundgearoo tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re clean of all your sins, you widdillo-skiddily neighborino. I will sing hymns of praise all over you and you will drown in the love of Christ. You’re farn-foodily- flank-fiddily reborn, kiddo-diddily.
Which turn around at a more consistent pace when you don't pump in bad money. Temporary measures create temporary jobs. All they did was basically shift the problem down the line.
By bad money I mean debt. The temporary measures I am talking about was the money the federal government pumped into a bunch of "green tech" companies to try and jumpstart that sector and a lot of public works projects that fizzled out after three years.
I’m on mobile and can’t remember the exact numbers. Everything is dwarfed by military and social spending, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t add up. Government exists to protect the people, so anything above that should be seen as add ons.
Your original comments make it seem as though these policies are creating lots of problems for the future when the reality is that their impact will be minimal because they are minimal in the big picture.
Government exists to protect the people, so anything above that should be seen as add ons.
The government is like any other human social entity. It exists to perpetuate itself, just like a business, family, or organization does. Of course this is incredibly simplified, but I think it illustrates my point.
The Laffer Curve is tangential to my comment. Given fixed expenditure, budget deficit increases when tax revenue decreases. This tax revenue decrease could be due to decreased economic activity from overtaxation (Laffer Curve) or it could be due to decreased economic activity during a recession (what my comment was talking about).
Yeah...not disagreeing with you on that. Decreased taxes, increased public spending, or decreased economic activity all contribute to increasing budget deficits.
First of all, my statement was a relative one. Many people think that tax policy is a predominant factor in economic performance. However, its role is over-inflated (mainly due to partisan politics).
Second of all, if you actually took your own advice you would learn that there are more important factors at play in macroeconomics, such as monetary cycles. If you want a prime example of this, see FDR's devaluation following the onset of the Great Depression. It was one of the few things he actually got right in that period. Luckily the NIRA was largely stymied before it could cause any real damage.
here's the thing as blue state 1% that people just don't get - prostitutes are fucking expensive. 500K a year is not even as much as you think when your 1br appt is 3K per month and you blow like 5K a month and whores. I barely have enough left over to save even 100K a year.
Woah, woah. Look, I'm not the one buying out houses for more than they are worth just because I can like the damn commiefornians. I just want to live in a state that hass got good food, lots of guns, and isn't a bunch of whiny bitches 24/7.
Since at least 5 years ago, we started getting Calis buying houses in cash. Since there are also lots of Chinese there, we are really seeing the damage they done around us.
High income taxes and property taxes can't be written off like they used to be at the federal level.
Democrats love taxes, so the blue states are heavily taxed.
This is actually BAD for republcians. As it is blue state idiots leave their crappy tax states, move into areas like NV and TX and vote blue idiots in who raise taxes. This will accelerate liberal flight.
Imagine, one day, with enough liberals and infrastructure spending, NV and TX might pay more into the federal system than they take out. Wouldn't that be something?
This is a table of the total federal tax revenue by state collected by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.
Gross collections indicates the total federal tax revenue collected by the IRS from each U.S. state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The figure includes all individual and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, estate taxes, gift taxes, and excise taxes. This table does not include federal tax revenue data from U.S. Armed Forces personnel stationed overseas, U.S. territories other than Puerto Rico, and U.S. citizens and legal residents living abroad, even though they may be required to pay federal taxes.
Ok I just looked up that organization. It appears to be run by a Jew. I saw several clear Jewish biases. /u/Chicup is smarter than that, they had to know he'd be on to them. Sad.
Jeffrey Mark Goldberg (born September 22, 1965) is an American journalist and the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic. During his nine years at The Atlantic prior to becoming editor, Goldberg became known for his coverage of foreign affairs. He has won many awards and written eleven cover stories for the magazine.
California is a blue state with high income taxes.
The GOP wanted to ram through this legislation without having to negotiate any votes from democrats, so they wrote it to benefit red states like Texas (allow property tax deduction) to get the vote of GOP representatives from Texas, while paying for those cuts by raising taxes in blue states (remove income tax deduction), because they don't care about votes of Democrat representatives from California.
For many, particularly those in Democratic areas who earn $200,000 or more, the increase would come from the repeal of the state and local tax deduction, known as SALT.
283 comments
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
Friendly reminder that trickle down economics is not a thing, and that it's a shitty political term used by left wingers (who have actually convinced themselves that it actually exists) to attack anything remotely pro-market (that they don't advocate for at the current time)
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Trickle down theory is a real economic theory. It's been proven to be ineffective.
1 ikitomi 2017-12-06
It's actually been proven effective in situations where you can actually expect and have those at the top spending and investing locally.
That doesn't really work anywhere anymore though...
/seriouspost
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
"It's actually been proven effective..."
Communism has also been proven effective in small groups.
The problem is, just like with communism the whole premise of the theory breaks down because that's not actual how people behave in the free market. It's a pipe dream.
1 ikitomi 2017-12-06
I know it's retarded slang but it's Past tense
Present tense
You're typing argumentatively while agreeing with me...
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Not my problem that you perceive my comments to be in disagreement, I was only stating facts
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
It absolutely is a thing. It's an economic theory. One that has been proven to be ineffective.
You are correct that the term is used to degrade any pro-business bills
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
No it isn't. No economist believes in it. It's a shitty political term
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
I have a degree in economics. It's a real economic theory.
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
I do too, no it isn't. You should know this as well. Here's a little explanation for you [1] [2]
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
"They are not reaching trickle down economics in universities."
Wrong right off the bat. That takes some talent.
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
They literally fucking don't.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Better call up my old prof and remind him how he totally didn't cover trickle down economics in his class
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
What did he say exactly? And for what class?
1 OnionBits 2017-12-06
Look dude, it's a economic theory, okay? Whether or not it works is up for debate, but it is a fucking THEORY
1 Douggem 2017-12-06
It's not real, it's a strawman. Seriously. I have no doubt in my mind some lefty economic professor taught it believing that it's actually advocated for by the right, but it's not.
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
Well, it literally fucking isn't. All it is, is a political term. Sooooo
1 OnionBits 2017-12-06
JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT A THING
HOW SELF ABSORBED ARE YOU
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
Enough to know that it's just a shitty political term that really doesn't even mean anything.
1 OnionBits 2017-12-06
/r/iamverysmart
Thx for the economic run down friendo. Go back to getting fucked by Muhammad you british cuck
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
It's not r/iamverysmart
It's r/ihavetheremotestunderstandingofwhateconomicsactuallyis
1 OnionBits 2017-12-06
Just because you say it doesn't make it true
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
Well I've linked to a bunch of explanation from econ phd's
1 OnionBits 2017-12-06
So have I
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2017-12-06
Here's a bunch of econ Phd's saying exactly what I'm saying
https://www.reddit.com/r/badeconomics/comments/7hkgla/trickledown_doesnt_work_because_stock_markets/
1 AlohaWarrior34 2017-12-06
Hey /u/botchlings.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Lol
1 rockidol 2017-12-06
Pro market? Is that what we’re calling slanted towards the rich now?
1 Alexlincoln2 2017-12-06
No it's what we call bills that promote the exchange of goods in the market. Tax cuts do that. Trust busting does that.
1 hexane360 2017-12-06
Where do you think the government's spending goes? Look up MPC and the income multiplier. Tax cuts for the rich are much more likely to go towards hookers and blow than food stamps.
1 im-a-koala 2017-12-06
Yeah but how else are those high class hookers supposed to get paid?
1 SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-12-06
Hookers and blow are consumption. And while MPC has the multiplier effect, the reverse side is MPS. Saving = investments. And in the long run the economy can only grow with investments.
1 Hydrium 2017-12-06
Hookers and blow are goods being consumed thus injecting money back into the economy, your argument is less you're angry at tax breaks for the rich and more that you don't like where the rich spend their money because it doesn't directly benefit you and your ideals.
1 wwaalleess 2017-12-06
Hey you're the tard from /r/ShitPoliticsSays
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
SALT BELOW
1 TheButtholeOfBravery 2017-12-06
Trickle down my economic bby 😍😍💦💦💦😩
1 CaptainNeeMoNoy 2017-12-06
Those poor, poor limousine liberals and their paltry 200k per year. If they get taxed much more they might even have to move out of their ivory towers.
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-06
They’d have to leave their apartments in hipster heaven SF and live amongst the uninformed mongloids! REEEeeeeee!
1 geraldodelrivero 2017-12-06
They might have to be near an illegal immigrant!
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-06
Undocumented migrant. Gtfo outta here with that hate speech.
1 Hydrium 2017-12-06
I want them quarantined in NY and Cali, I don't want those retards moving to middle america and infecting it.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
I know, you guys might have to start actually working.
1 ucstruct 2017-12-06
You don't know what ivory tower means do you?
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
That complete lack of self awareness... Holy shit.
"Raise taxes on the rich! Make them pay!"
Taxes are being raised for the top 2 percent of income earners. Anyone with an income of more than $200,000 will pay more in taxes.
"I didn't mean me, you dumb fucks! I meant the rich!"
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2017-12-06
People forget that even social heavens like Sweden being at bottom tier still has effective tax rate 40-50%.
1 TherapyFortheRapy 2017-12-06
In fairness, you do get a lot of shit for free just living in Sweden. I'm not sure it's worth the tradeoff, but it's a legitimate choice.
Democrats in this country want a similar level of taxation, but instead of actual healthcare and free college, they're just going to force you to buy the same shitty healthcare you've already rejected (because it's expensive and won't cover anything), and want to send you to SJW factories instead of giving you a real education.
1 SDIHTD 2017-12-06
"In fairness", it's not free. It's paid for by the tax payer.
1 Rith2 2017-12-06
College shouldn’t be free but even sensible degrees cost a fuckton and you can’t get rid of that debt even if you die
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2017-12-06
It actually depends on the person. If you don't like working and getting free shit then it is the best place. But if you are workaholic and alcoholic then it is the shittiest.
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
Democrats never seem to mention that "free college" in Europe usually means "free, assuming your grades and test scores are high enough or else enjoy your lovely career in the trades college."
1 RedditIsLiteralAIDS 2017-12-06
Also European unis are fucking terrible. Literally the only places with any quality are British or Swiss (i.e., not in the EU).
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
Britain is in the EU, has been for decades, and still will be for another year or two.
And there are plenty of good European universities Americans don't know about because they don't teach in English.
1 RedditIsLiteralAIDS 2017-12-06
There's not a single quality European uni outwith CH and the UK. Not one. Fucking Singapore alone has more top-tier unis than your entire dying continent.
Come to grips with the fact your entire castrated continent and civilisation hasn't been relevant since Hitler. Then kill yourself while listening to insufferable dance music.
1 StezzerLolz 2017-12-06
I mean, you're just straight-up fuckin' incorrect, but whatever...
1 RedditIsLiteralAIDS 2017-12-06
I mean, I'm just straight-up fuckin' not.
Fucking Singapore has more top-tier unis than the whole of the non-UK EU. Cry harder that your entire civilisation hasn't been relevant since Hitler, eurocuck.
1 StezzerLolz 2017-12-06
ooh, nice goalpost moving. Heads up, dude, most people don't go to Harvard or Yale, they go to shitty scum-tier colleges in rural Ohio or whatever. Still, you're probably still 16 or something, so keep up the good work and I'm sure with your insight and broad knowledge you'll find out for yourself. If you're lucky.
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
Not to mention that most of the good universities in the US are in blue states.
1 RollTide09 2017-12-06
Also it’s pretty easy to get a scholarship here in the states if you made decent grades. Especially if you’re not white or Asian.
1 TheCodexx 2017-12-06
The waivers and grants alone can literally pay for someone's entire education. You have to be retarded to pay what is quoted.
1 Cycloptichorn 2017-12-06
'cept those are going to be taxable income under the new bill
1 JonF1 2017-12-06
Uhh no its not?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/get-real-on-scholarships/2011/03/08/ABM4LfR_story.html
1 SpectroSpecter 2017-12-06
I got into a pretty nice college with grades so bad it was actually kind of funny. What they're really looking for is someone who will consistently pay them lots of money and probably not detonate a bomb during class one day. A 4.0 is more an indicator that you take education seriously enough to not default on your loan than anything.
1 rockidol 2017-12-06
You need high grades and test courses to get in American college so it’s still better
1 walkthisway34 2017-12-06
No you don't. JCs will take anyone who graduated high school, and some 4 year schools don't have much higher standards.
1 HaulOfChina 2017-12-06
What's wrong with that? If you don't cut it you shouldn't be able to take a spot from somebody smarter than you just because your family has money or influence.
In Norway at least, people with shit grades are allowed to try to improve them anyway, but they have to pay for it themselves because they screwed it up the first time. The cost is about $100 per subject (used to be $50, but then a lot of people didn't show up for the exam.).
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
I don't think there is anything wrong with that. I'm merely pointing out that the "free college just like Europe" crowd here tends to gloss over the "for qualified students only" bit.
1 heavenlytoaster 2017-12-06
To be fair, that's a bait and switch I can get behind.
1 HaulOfChina 2017-12-06
Oh. Then its worth mentioning that if you drop out or fail your classes you have to pay back 100% of your student loans (like 15k yearly for living expenses at government run institutions, and added tuition if you go to a private one) instead of like 65% if you pass. Higher education here is pretty ok, but if you go just to fuck around it will cost you a bit.
1 JonF1 2017-12-06
This is more or less the same situation we face now. Not anyone can just roll into the state schools anymore. Applying to college has gotten insanely competitive.
1 weniscommander 2017-12-06
Maybe we should start investing into public education at the K-12 level so kids don't end up spouting idiocy like this.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
lol
1 Singulaire 2017-12-06
He's not wrong, if we start indoctrinating at an earlier age we would see fewer objections.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
Just put estrogen straight into the diaper linings.
1 RedditIsLiteralAIDS 2017-12-06
Yes, get raped, mostly.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
Halal rapes, for instance.
1 rockidol 2017-12-06
Sjw factories? That’s just a conservative caricature that doesn’t reflect actual reality
1 parameciidae 2017-12-06
I know. Sometimes being on reddit is like watching Fox News with my grandma.
1 TastesLikeAss 2017-12-06
You might want to check out Swedish Universities some time
1 Kuonji 2017-12-06
My taxes will go up about $3,000 due to the SALT deduction removal and I don't make anywhere near $200,000 a year.
1 TherapyFortheRapy 2017-12-06
If you itemize your tax returns, most Americans won't have much sympathy for you.
Understand that as a result of Obama's shitty handling of the 2007 crash, the most common wage in America is about 25k a year. More than 50% of Americans make that, or less. That's the issue with inequality--to over 50% of America, you're still 'the rich'.
Honestly, it's only going to go up. You've got three options: disenfranchise, actual work on income inequality, or slowly watch your country descend into communism. The first will probably cause a lot of terrorism in a country where mass shootings are already common (largely due to the social anomie caused by men unable to earn enough to attract a wife or have a valid place in society. The second will cause real political reforms, as the current system encourages nothing but obeying the wealthy until the entire thing explodes. And the third...well, honestly, that's where we're going. Communism wasn't actually considered a 'big thing' 10-20 years ago like it is now, and the 2007 crash (or more accurately, this political systems complete refusal to respond to it) is largely responsible for that
1 DeepDickedHillybilly 2017-12-06
Are you memeing or is this real?
1 heavenlytoaster 2017-12-06
Yes
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
I'd love to hear your "critique" of his economic policies. Funny enough, many of them were inherited from the GWB administration.
1 glmox 2017-12-06
in my non-expert opinion im pretty comfortable saying that might have something to do with the issue
1 aqouta 2017-12-06
People who unironically think they're smarter than GWB while having accomplished nothing in their pathetic lives should neck themselves. Dude made some decisions I don't like but he's genuinely probably smarter than both of us combined.
1 glmox 2017-12-06
youre conflating intelligence with virtue in a really weird way
also old people are all senile fools so hes probably only barely smarter than us
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-06
Source? Your ass lmao. This is r/drama. There are no real experts on politics and economics. Calm down.
1 shallowm 2017-12-06
This is what happens when we go overboard with praising bussy.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
lol
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
According to factcheck.org, if you're taking the SALT deduction, you're probably "rich enough."
1 TastesLikeAss 2017-12-06
How did you figure that out? Ive looked for some online calculators to figure out the difference for me but I get wildly different results
1 Kuonji 2017-12-06
Took last year's state tax I deducted and looked at 35% of that and came up with that number.
1 TastesLikeAss 2017-12-06
Yes but you might get more from the new standard deduction and other changes. Im not a fan of the plan, just trying to figure out how to calculate all this shit.
1 Kuonji 2017-12-06
I won't. My itemized deductions are higher, still.
In general I wouldn't mind it that much except for the fact that if I knew this was coming, I might have held off on buying a house. I budgeted things out a certain way expecting certain deductions and that benefit is getting reduced quite a bit.
Have a feeling property values will go down because of this, as well.
1 TastesLikeAss 2017-12-06
Yeah, I live in NY and am trying to buy a house in CT. Either state, Im getting royally fucked on property taxes and state taxes as deductions.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-06
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
Nothing expressed in that bullshit opinion takes away from the fact that a bunch of rich people screaming "eat the rich" are bitching about about being put on the menu.
To be blunt, I really have no sympathy for someone in the top three percent of household income shitting on the top one percent for being "too rich."
Also, the left has never accepted "I don't like what my tax dollars are being used for" whenever they are raising taxes. As far as I'm concerned, this is yet another case of
that has become the hallmark of the American left.
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
You're missing the part where rich people making over $200k in red states are getting a tax cut, but people making over $200k in California or New York are getting a tax hike. It's legislation finely tuned to hurt Democrat voters only.
1 MrAnalog 2017-12-06
You're missing the part where red states aren't taxing the fuck out of their residents, and blue states are. If you are going to see your tax burden spike if the SALT deduction goes away, it's because your state and local governments need to lower their taxes.
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
Texas does, it's a red state with high taxes - property taxes. But conveniently, the GOP tax bill still allows property taxes to be deducted. So that Texas, a GOP state can benefit. Because the head of the GOP controlled House Ways and Means committee is from Texas, a red state.
Which proves this isn't some principled change in tax policy, it's weaponization of the tax code against blue states.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Then those cucks need to write their state and tell them to lower taxes. How the fuck is it you think republicans are responsible for high as fuck state taxes? Are you retarded or just LARPing as one
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
Nah, the old rules were fine - they allowed states to fund their infrastructure without drastically raising the tax burden of the population.
And in the end, states like NY and CA - some of the losers in this bill, are some of the few that actually pain into the system instead of useless leech red states that gloat about low taxes, while taking handouts to stay alive.
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
Texas is a red state with high taxes - property taxes. But conveniently, the GOP tax bill still allows property taxes to be deducted. So that Texas, a red state can benefit. Because the head of the GOP controlled House Ways and Means committee represents Texas, a red state.
Which proves this isn't some principled change in tax policy, it's weaponization of the tax code against blue states.
1 rockidol 2017-12-06
Oh lord cut the partisan crap will you?
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
$200k is middle class in my area, that's a working professional's wage, usually with a high cost of living to go with it. Most people here are ok with paying more taxes, and redistributive policies in general. They aren't ok paying more taxes to offset a tax cut for the super wealthy, and those of equal earners in other states. You don't need to pretend that's the same thing, or that it's somehow weird that people feel this way.
As for local taxes being the problem - well, that is generally how you build a state that actually produces more than it takes in. Even with the deductions - states like NY and CA were carrying the rest of you leeches.
1 heavenlytoaster 2017-12-06
Hopefully you've already built gates, the raids to eat your rich bitch ass are coming.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
There isn't all that much to take. At $200k most people still here still rent. You're better off raiding where $200k makes you rich.
1 heavenlytoaster 2017-12-06
You must own a lot of useless shit if you make 200k and one of the things you own isn't your house.
Sounds like a great place to raid.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
Yeah that's how it works bwahaha. Jesus, you'd make a shit viking. There are whole towns around here where the median home price is well north of four mil, and you want to raid mid-grade techies with no assets to speak of.
1 Douggem 2017-12-06
200k is middle class everywhere in America but you're still going to be considered rich by the jobless liberal arts majors calling for higher taxes. You can try to reason with them and tell them you couldn't even afford the townhouse with the terrace and your Mercedes doesn't have massaging seats but they aren't going to listen to you.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
I guess I meant more like lower middle "probably shouldn't have a family on that income" class.
1 FIThrowAway125 2017-12-06
Calling shenanigans on this. What is your area?
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/24/twitter-employee-earning-160000-says-hes-barely-making-ends-meet.html
1 [deleted] 2017-12-06
[removed]
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
He's also just scraping by.
That's because you don't understand how people live in SF. The median wage being what it is, and it's basic incompatibility with the cost of living in the area, is a problem. Some, view it as a crisis.
People are dogpiling into apartments - but that is not a middle class existence.
https://i.imgur.com/w7wGJUf.jpg
If all you can afford to rent is a modest two-bedroom apartment - you're not wealthy.
1 [deleted] 2017-12-06
[removed]
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
Realistically, to not live in a shithole in SF, you need to be making well over 100k - and at that point you're likely to be still be sharing an apt. 200k is not the bare-minimum to have a middle class lifestyle in SF, but it's nowhere near enough to be wealthy. Everyone who makes 200k in SF, or Bay Area in general, is very much middle class.
If you can't afford a decent 3br in a building that isn't falling apart, you're not wealthy. You might not be poor, but you sure as shit haven't climbed out of middle class yet.
1 mr_almeida 2017-12-06
lol seriously. I wanted to comment "wtf I hate taxing the rich now" but wrongly assumed nobody would dislike this.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
But that's clearly not what is happening here bwahaha.
1 SwankDogsbody 2017-12-06
Making more than 200k a year would put you in the top few percent, wouldn't it?
1 toynbeeidea16 2017-12-06
I think current US average is like $52,000?
1 aqouta 2017-12-06
That's median.
1 toynbeeidea16 2017-12-06
I thought that was the same thing? I don't know from math or econmics too good.
1 Trajan_ 2017-12-06
Average can mean median or mean. But in this case median is probably better.
1 WereCarrot 2017-12-06
Average is the sum of all the elements divided by the number of elements. The median is the value closest to the center of the sorted data set.
1 hexane360 2017-12-06
learn a book
1 D4ddyDr4m4 2017-12-06
This explains why the median is $52,000
1 caffienatedjedi 2017-12-06
Breaking 60k puts you in the top 20% iirc
1 aqouta 2017-12-06
Top 3% according to Wikipedia.
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-06
I think 1% nationwide was 400k. I could be wrong. 200k is probably top 2-4ish.
1 ProgressiveFragility 2017-12-06
AFAIR nationwide 1% is about to 200k, in California it might be 400k though.
1 AnnoysTheGoys 2017-12-06
Somewhere between the 80th & 95th percentile in CA: https://statisticalatlas.com/place/California/San-Francisco/Household-Income
1 SDIHTD 2017-12-06
The imaginary caricature rich liberals have dreamed up in their mind when they spout "tax the rich"
https://imgur.com/Vxr5GKR
1 youpostyoudie 2017-12-06
The guy in the bottom is worth 2.3 billion and he made an app that connects to your Fitbit and sends you a funny gif every time your heart rates rockets above 150 from panic attacks.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
I'mma make a billion dollars selling a punching bag that looks like that guy
1 LSU_Coonass 2017-12-06
this comment made me consider suicide.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Some idiot in that thread just unironically used the term "Obama era economic glow"
Holy fuck the delusion is nearly tangible.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
I didn't see nuffin glow
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Only thing that glowed during his president was small middle eastern villages after Obama's drone got through with them
1 froibo 2017-12-06
If you can't see a difference between 2008 and 2016 economy you might be retarded.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Only took 9 trillion in debt for a moderate economic recovery. What a great economic decision!
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Well I'm sure you will furrow your brow when you hear that this new tax plan is going to further extend our debt.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
I'm not commenting on the new tax plan, I'm talking about Obamas retarded bailouts
1 CaptainNeeMoNoy 2017-12-06
You're both fucking retarded. The smart move would just be to print more money until the debt is gone. The US has the capability of printing hundreds of thousands of dollars per day: if it wasnt for the Jewish elite restricting money production we would all be rich.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
It really says something about Reddit that I'm not sure if you're kidding or not
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Because you are retarded.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Weak
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Your ability to detect overt satire is.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
"I www only pretending to be retarded"
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Not an argument
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Quiet retard kys
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Weak
1 ProgressiveFragility 2017-12-06
omg haha
1 siempreloco31 2017-12-06
This was... Bush. And it's well regarded as a success. Where did you get your meme degree?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Bush did one bailout, Obama did several. Tired of educating you braindead sluts
1 siempreloco31 2017-12-06
Still never answered this. Also the stimulus was very successful.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
I'm under no obligation to give some sperggie on the internet personal info.
Also The stimulus was a horrible failure if you consider the amount of money added onto our national debt.
1 siempreloco31 2017-12-06
Welcome to macro 101. Your first lesson is to not think of the government like a household.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Yes I'm sure there is no downside to adding 9 trillion to our deficit.
1 siempreloco31 2017-12-06
Friend, you're throwing a number out like it means something. What's the debt-to-GDP?
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Funny this guy can't talk about anything above a high school text book.
1 shallowm 2017-12-06
DEGREEEEE IN ECONOMICS
1 carthoris26 2017-12-06
You're aware that as long as the government can make interest payments more debt is good? It's not like a credit card.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Uh yeah, I'm not the one who said national debt is more important than economic growth.
1 hlary 2017-12-06
uh huh definitely retarded
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
I have a degree in economics, what are your qualifications?
1 froibo 2017-12-06
I like where this is going.
1 hlary 2017-12-06
not but a reading of freakonomics but do i really need a degree to call you a retard on /r/drama ?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Oh, so you just want a slap fight?
Fine I unironically hope a jungle demon turns your insides to mush by brutally raping your corpse.
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-06
Which economic theory does jungle demon rape fall under? With your degree I expect a quality answer.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Socialism.
1 heavenlytoaster 2017-12-06
Keynesian
1 hlary 2017-12-06
also you being disingenuous lil' fagget failing to mention dubyas 2009 budget plan and the emergency funds that congress passed during the recession
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Oh yes silly me I forgot whatever bad happened under Obama is Bush's fault and everything good happening under Trump is also Obamas doing.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Is u/froibo a regular or lolcow we summoned, I don't want to downvote a lolcow but seriously people that retarded shouldn't be permitted to breed
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
I've been downvoting him because he's not a lolcow, just a straight retard.
If he had anything to contribute besides "lol ur retarded" I would encourage him, but he's just boring tbh
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Hmmmmmm
1 froibo 2017-12-06
WAAAAAAH WHY WON'T ANY OF THE ECONOMICS LEADERS SUPPORT WHAT I'M SAYING
1 TotesMessenger 2017-12-06
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1 Strictlybutters 2017-12-06
I'll have you know that /u/froibo has a degree in economics, what are your qualifications?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
You're a little late to the party friendo. Get delayed at the anal plug store?
1 Strictlybutters 2017-12-06
Yeah they had trouble finding my size.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Yeah most stores don't carry torpedoes in stock
1 Strictlybutters 2017-12-06
Torpedos yeeesh I wish my bussy was that tight. You must use kegels. Only using soviet submarines over here champ
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Typhoon class?
1 Strictlybutters 2017-12-06
Lets just say I conducted my own personal hunt for The Red October ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
1 froibo 2017-12-06
You are defending a guy that sounds a lot like he is spurting out libertarian economics. I hope you are proud of yourself.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Get fucked libcuck
1 froibo 2017-12-06
:(
1 wow___justwow 2017-12-06
he's a regular
upvote him anyway you're on /r/drama faggot
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
I down vote regulars
1 Time_to_Drink 2017-12-06
Post bussy
1 Strictlybutters 2017-12-06
Mmmmmmmm thanks for the tasty pasta
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
Debt usually grows faster when you're taking in less tax revenue, something that tends to happen during recessions.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Recessions and recoveries occur naturally in our economy.
The economic cycle is: upturn, downturn, recovery, and depression. It's a naturally occurring cycle. What you DON'T do is bail out too big to fail banks and businesses like Obama did. We almost universally agree that this was a horrible decision.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
No one agrees with that. The entire country would have been bankrupted.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Bush did one bailout.
Obama did several bailouts.
You're actually talking out of your ass. I would suggest sticking with shitposting because you might have a chance of winning an argument like that.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
It was a complete bipartisan effort. Show me a respected economist that said the banks should have been allowed to fail.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
-every economist who understands the free market
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Uh huh.
1 wolfdreams01 2017-12-06
Mind blown. You have just taking trolling to epic proportions, congratulations sir.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
......lol
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Care to explain why you disagree?
That's right you can't explain. Because I actually studied this shit for years and you're just spewing shit out of gloryhole you call a mouth.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
I disagree because it's a vast oversimplification.
I am highly dubious that you actually "studied this shit for years".
1 froibo 2017-12-06
He has an economic degree that he printed from the internet.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
So you don't actually disagree? You're just stirring the waters because I had to dumb it down for the Reddit mouth breathers?
1 shitpersonality 2017-12-06
Where did you get your armchair degree in economics?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Where did you get your degree in economics? Wait you don't have one?
1 shitpersonality 2017-12-06
Do you even have a degree?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Yes?
1 shitpersonality 2017-12-06
Did you major in butthurt with a minor in bussyblasting?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Weak
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
There's no substance to your statement with which to disagree. You can't "dumb down" something which didn't mean anything in the first place.
Here, let me try:
Humans are: water, carbon, and nitrogen. Trust me on this, I've studied this shit on Wikipedia for years.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
The point of my comment was that recessions and recoveries occur naturally in the economy. Do you disagree with that?
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
It's another non-statement. Deaths occur naturally among human populations. This statement is of virtually no use to anyone. Likewise is the assertion that economic health is sinusoidal. What matters is the nature of these variations and their context.
In your original comment you spat out a non-statement to introduce your tangential opinion about the Economic Stabilization Act. It was the verbal equivalent of you fucking up a slight of hand.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
r/iamverysmart
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Tell us more about your degree.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
Self-awareness clearly is not your strong suit.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
accuses me of writing meaningless text
writes two paragraphs of iamverysmart nothingburger
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
> "nothingburger"
This alone warrants the death sentence.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-06
Well come and carry out your sentence bitch
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
What the darn-diddily-doodily did you just say about me, you little witcharooney? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class at Springfield Bible College, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret mission trips in Capital City, and I have over 300 confirmed baptisms. I am trained in the Old Testament and I’m the top converter in the entire church mission group. You are nothing to me but just another heathen. I will cast your sins out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before in Heaven, mark my diddily-iddilly words. You think you can get away with saying that blasphemy to me over the Internet? Think again, friendarino. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of evangelists across Springfield and your IP is being traced by God right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggorino. The storm that wipes out the diddily little thing you call your life of sin. You’re going to Church, kiddily-widdily. Jesus can be anywhere, anytime, and he can turn you to the Gospel in over infinity ways, and that’s just with his bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in preaching to nonbelievers, but I have access to the entire dang- diddily Bible collection of the Springfield Bible College and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your sins away off the face of the continent, you diddily-doo satan-worshipper. If only you could have known what holy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you from the Heavens, maybe you would have held your darn-diddily-fundgearoo tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re clean of all your sins, you widdillo-skiddily neighborino. I will sing hymns of praise all over you and you will drown in the love of Christ. You’re farn-foodily- flank-fiddily reborn, kiddo-diddily.
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-12-06
Which turn around at a more consistent pace when you don't pump in bad money. Temporary measures create temporary jobs. All they did was basically shift the problem down the line.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
What constitutes "bad money"?
Furthermore, what "temporary measures" are you talking about?
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-12-06
By bad money I mean debt. The temporary measures I am talking about was the money the federal government pumped into a bunch of "green tech" companies to try and jumpstart that sector and a lot of public works projects that fizzled out after three years.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
What bills and programs are you referring to specifically and how much total debt did these two contribute to the federal budget?
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-12-06
I’m on mobile and can’t remember the exact numbers. Everything is dwarfed by military and social spending, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t add up. Government exists to protect the people, so anything above that should be seen as add ons.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
Your original comments make it seem as though these policies are creating lots of problems for the future when the reality is that their impact will be minimal because they are minimal in the big picture.
The government is like any other human social entity. It exists to perpetuate itself, just like a business, family, or organization does. Of course this is incredibly simplified, but I think it illustrates my point.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Google the laffer curve, retard. Any college freshman knows that shit.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
The Laffer Curve is tangential to my comment. Given fixed expenditure, budget deficit increases when tax revenue decreases. This tax revenue decrease could be due to decreased economic activity from overtaxation (Laffer Curve) or it could be due to decreased economic activity during a recession (what my comment was talking about).
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
When you cut taxes the tax receipts always increase this is like a basic economics 101 fact.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
Yeah...not disagreeing with you on that. Decreased taxes, increased public spending, or decreased economic activity all contribute to increasing budget deficits.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Cut taxes the economy roars to life, more taxes taken in. Every time. Liberals are idiots.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
Not really.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
LOL okay dude take an entry level econ class at the very least and see how stupid that is to say.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
First of all, my statement was a relative one. Many people think that tax policy is a predominant factor in economic performance. However, its role is over-inflated (mainly due to partisan politics).
Second of all, if you actually took your own advice you would learn that there are more important factors at play in macroeconomics, such as monetary cycles. If you want a prime example of this, see FDR's devaluation following the onset of the Great Depression. It was one of the few things he actually got right in that period. Luckily the NIRA was largely stymied before it could cause any real damage.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
Pasta?
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2017-12-06
You can try. Doubt it will stick.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-06
That stale, eh?
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
I can see a difference in the 2017 economy.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Oh I bet. 11 months later and the world suddenly is filled with butterflies and rainbows.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
And money. And leftist breakdowns. Good stuff.
1 froibo 2017-12-06
Amazing how we could recover so quickly after the worst depression the world ever faced in 2016.
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
There's no magic wand you can wave!
1 wwaalleess 2017-12-06
> liberal
> have money
Pick one.
1 shitpersonality 2017-12-06
Liberals dont live in the poor states, fam.
1 JasonJewnova 2017-12-06
Ooh baby
1 geraldodelrivero 2017-12-06
Hey, it could be their daddy’s money.
1 take_a_dumpling 2017-12-06
here's the thing as blue state 1% that people just don't get - prostitutes are fucking expensive. 500K a year is not even as much as you think when your 1br appt is 3K per month and you blow like 5K a month and whores. I barely have enough left over to save even 100K a year.
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-06
Only 5k a month? What a pleb. Good bussy should run 10k a month at minimum. You must be getting that low grade gussy.
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-12-06
He doesn't even get the good gussy, he's still going after the common ones that will sleep with anyone!
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
Bussy is free
1 Time_to_Drink 2017-12-06
Well, your bussy is.....still no takers.
1 wolfdreams01 2017-12-06
Only $10k a month? Pfft, I scoffed so hard at this that my monocle fell off.
1 TherapyFortheRapy 2017-12-06
They were for increasing taxes on the wealthy, before they were against it!
1 Chicup 2017-12-06
Live in a blue state.
Make over 200k.
Son'of'a'bitch I hate Trump now!
No really I hate the assholes in my blue state who raise taxes with no real returns for anyone except the corrupt and connected people.
1 weniscommander 2017-12-06
Illinois?
1 Chicup 2017-12-06
Yea but I'm pretty sure it applies to any blue state.
1 caffienatedjedi 2017-12-06
I bailed last year. Enjoying my no income tax and paying less sales tax.
1 Pepperglue 2017-12-06
Texas? You guys are making it harder for me to get a nice house in the future REEEEEE.
1 caffienatedjedi 2017-12-06
Woah, woah. Look, I'm not the one buying out houses for more than they are worth just because I can like the damn commiefornians. I just want to live in a state that hass got good food, lots of guns, and isn't a bunch of whiny bitches 24/7.
1 Pepperglue 2017-12-06
Oh okay. You cool.
Since at least 5 years ago, we started getting Calis buying houses in cash. Since there are also lots of Chinese there, we are really seeing the damage they done around us.
1 im-a-koala 2017-12-06
The property taxes around Chicago are seriously insane. At least you can still deduct those, I guess.
1 Masterthrowaway9001 2017-12-06
Can someone explain to me why this only affects blue states? Genuinely don't know.
1 Chicup 2017-12-06
High income taxes and property taxes can't be written off like they used to be at the federal level.
Democrats love taxes, so the blue states are heavily taxed.
This is actually BAD for republcians. As it is blue state idiots leave their crappy tax states, move into areas like NV and TX and vote blue idiots in who raise taxes. This will accelerate liberal flight.
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
Imagine, one day, with enough liberals and infrastructure spending, NV and TX might pay more into the federal system than they take out. Wouldn't that be something?
1 Chicup 2017-12-06
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
¯\(ツ)/¯
Blue, red, blue, red, blue blue red.
If only we had more urban poor to shift the red ones blue, amiright?
1 WikiTextBot 2017-12-06
Federal tax revenue by state
This is a table of the total federal tax revenue by state collected by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.
Gross collections indicates the total federal tax revenue collected by the IRS from each U.S. state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The figure includes all individual and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, estate taxes, gift taxes, and excise taxes. This table does not include federal tax revenue data from U.S. Armed Forces personnel stationed overseas, U.S. territories other than Puerto Rico, and U.S. citizens and legal residents living abroad, even though they may be required to pay federal taxes.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28
1 kermit_was_right 2017-12-06
Do you understand the difference between gross and net? CA and NY pay more than they take. Texas takes more than it pays.
1 AnnoysTheGoys 2017-12-06
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/
1 shallowm 2017-12-06
Ok I just looked up that organization. It appears to be run by a Jew. I saw several clear Jewish biases. /u/Chicup is smarter than that, they had to know he'd be on to them. Sad.
1 WikiTextBot 2017-12-06
Jeffrey Goldberg
Jeffrey Mark Goldberg (born September 22, 1965) is an American journalist and the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic. During his nine years at The Atlantic prior to becoming editor, Goldberg became known for his coverage of foreign affairs. He has won many awards and written eleven cover stories for the magazine.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28
1 atsteak 2017-12-06
Texas is a red state with high property taxes.
California is a blue state with high income taxes.
The GOP wanted to ram through this legislation without having to negotiate any votes from democrats, so they wrote it to benefit red states like Texas (allow property tax deduction) to get the vote of GOP representatives from Texas, while paying for those cuts by raising taxes in blue states (remove income tax deduction), because they don't care about votes of Democrat representatives from California.
1 rewind45 2017-12-06
What do you do?
1 Chicup 2017-12-06
Sell propane and propane accessories.
1 King_Drumpf 2017-12-06
"We need to tax the rich! No no don't tax us! Tax the other guys!"
1 barbadosslim 2017-12-06
if it hurts rich people I’m for it
1 ragazzo_soup 2017-12-06
Tfw you want to eat the rich but it turns out you are the rich.
1 SpectroSpecter 2017-12-06
Is that feeling also the feeling of being literally everyone on reddit?
1 BigLordShiggot 2017-12-06
Liberals 2015: Tax the rich!
Liberals 2016: lol red states are full of poors!
Liberals 2017: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
1 drunk_injun 2017-12-06
Best comment in this thread, tbh
1 Neronoah 2017-12-06
I'll seriouspost: yes, it taxes upper middle class people more*, but it's a ruse to tax rich people more (while still having a big deficit).
I must admit it's a good ruse.
*that being said between taxes and overpriced houses that amount of money is less impressive
1 JonF1 2017-12-06
200K isn't exactly rich for some parts of California
1 IntellectualEuphoria 2017-12-06
hahahahahahaha
1 LSU_Coonass 2017-12-06
wtf i love raising taxes now
1 FreeDory 2017-12-06