Bad Day for Wisconsin

#101
#101
utgibbs said:
Multiplier effect requires reinvestment.

There has been almost none.

But please, give us the curve showing tax cuts to the rich and corporations and the "trickle down" effect.

We already lived through that, and it didn't work, droski.
Click to expand...

So, you are saying the money that these fat cats make never get spent on anything?
 
#102
#102
hohenfelsvol said:
So, you are saying the money that these fat cats make never get spent on anything?
Click to expand...

The massive trend since the near collapse (thank heavens for the government!) of capitalism ca 2007-2008 has been corporate hoarding / stockpiling / etc.

Reinvestment and job creation not happening.

The notion that business would flee WI without $140 million is patently absurd too.

So this is the environment of the tax breaks to the rich given away by the Wisconsin government. This is what has suddenly spurred a "financial crisis" in Madison.
 
#105
#105
utvolpj said:
I'm confused, are you thanking the gov't for their hand in the collapse?
Click to expand...

Well, I was being facetious, personally.

It was a thank you from all the voices of Capitalism who would be gone now if the government hadn't stepped in to save the system.

Please note, I'm certainly not hoping for a "crash landing." I, naturally, would like to see a rational transition. I fear the "crash landing" scenario a great deal. If two world wars, and a Cold War which threatened human extinction weren't enough to prove Capitalism sees destruction as an opportunity for expansion, I don't know what will.
 
Last edited:
#106
#106
self-evident meaning you're the only one smart enough to understand it? It looks like your claim really doesn't sit well with anyone else
 
#108
#108
Laughing at the village idiot has lost its luster. I'm thinking it might be time for me to simply put utgibbs on the Ignore the Moron list.
 
#109
#109
Vol423 said:
Laughing at the village idiot has lost its luster. I'm thinking it might be time for me to simply put utgibbs on the Ignore the Moron list.
Click to expand...

Essentially where I am. Outlandish silliness has lost its appeal.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#110
#110
sjt18 said:
If you get a real response to this simple explanation... please PM me so I don't miss it. I am still struggling about whether to believe that gibbs is a complete fake or if someone can truly be as detached from the real world as he is.
Click to expand...

And yet the jobs we've been discussing in WI aren't created by businesses at all.

In fact, without those jobs, what would happen to business?

And, for the last time, show me how the $140 million in tax cuts became > $140 million for the people of Wisconsin. It has evidently thrown the state into "fiscal crisis" as we've been discussing for a few weeks now. Self-evident doesn't get, well, more self-evident than that.

It's "2nd grade stuff" after all. Show me, show me, show me (how you do that trick)....

I like IP a lot. But he lost the plot, and this debate, about as badly as one can.
 
Last edited:
#113
#113
Clearly the one guy going against what everyone else says, many of whom rely on economic analysis to make a living, deserves an explanation for why the status qui is as such but he is clearly not obligated to offer up his own reasoning other than 140 > 137.

Not sure why everyone can't see the bizarro world outside the backdoor.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#114
#114
droski said:
i tell you what. if you show me the hundreds of thousands of jobs saved by obama's stimulus plan i'll show you evidence of the people making money from these tax cuts. i'll help you out. neither is an available tangable number. go google multiplier effect and get back to me.
Click to expand...

Excellent idea. Lets look at the multiplier effect for various government actions. Here is a chart from Moodys Analytics, a private, for profit risk management service for capital markets.

It turns out tax cuts are one of the least stimulative actions a government can take. Note that this says nothing about the fairness of tax rates or cuts or the availability of funds to provide stimulus. If the goal is stimulus itself, tax cuts are a poor answer.
 

Attachments

  • Fiscal multipliers in US.jpg
    Fiscal multipliers in US.jpg
    69 KB · Views: 1
#115
#115
kptvol said:
Clearly the one guy going against what everyone else says, many of whom rely on economic analysis to make a living, deserves an explanation for why the status qui is as such but he is clearly not obligated to offer up his own reasoning other than 140 > 137.

Not sure why everyone can't see the bizarro world outside the backdoor.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You are way behind on the whole WI thread.

1. Showed $140 million long ago from the WI ledgers themselves.

2. Demonstrated ad infinitum the lack of reinvestment, job creation, and capital hoarding.

3. Used Walker's $137 million.

4. I did not even go there yet, but, sure, even when reinvestment is on the cards, tax cuts are poor stimulus. I did mention some history though. Namely, we lived through "trickle down" and it didn't work.

I've asked, several times now, the guys who depend on economic analysis for a living, and the guy who says its "2nd grade stuff" to give us a demonstration of their prowess.

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting though. Because I'd die.
 
Last edited:
#116
#116
utgibbs said:
It was a bad day for Wisconsin, but was it a good day for the world?

It has been great to see the Class War so naked and in such bold technicolor. Walker et al. gave 140 million in cuts and new spending to corporations in order to create a $137 million deficit. And they took it from the teachers. Not since the Haymarket massacre has the Class War been so brutal and in our faces.

The working class is totally disenfranchised from the parliamentary system now. The Democrats would have been more conciliatory, but Capital, in its now terminal structural crisis, would have demanded much the same from them. And they would have obliged.

We are truly at another "Taxation without Representation" moment in our history. Will this spark a mass movement?

Doubtful. Walker may be recalled, it is true. But his job is done. Reformist movements after WWII were fine, since Capital cannot distinguish between production and destruction. But now that Capital is in its terminal crisis, it must first take back what was won in order to sustain itself. Which is why the "social democracies" across Europe have undergone metamorphosis into "New Labour" and the rest. The forces of absolute reaction - Walker Republicans and Cameron's "New Conservatives" are unapologetic in their obsequience to Capital.

We are a debauched culture at the End-Times of Capitalism. We will continue to sink into despotism, I fear, unless the culture is morally, rationally, and irreversibly rejuvenated.
Click to expand...

You've got to be an absolute idiot if you believe this?

Do you really believe this crap?

This is about keeping good teachers and not losing them due to a stupid Union rule that states last in first out whenever there are cuts. This rule takes job performance totally off the table and is pathetic.

Get a clue man. Seriously, get a clue.

And don't come back to me about some stupid book you read or some imaginary gorilla or the view of the real world out your back door.
 
#118
#118
sjt18 said:
You keep repeating that the tax cuts didn't help the economy of WI. If those businesses are still in state and operating after the economy we've been through then the investment was worth it. A tax cut of $140 million suggests several billion dollars worth of economic activity... probably in the 10's if not 100's of billions. I know you struggle with the real sources of wealth within an economy and the dynamics of wealth creation... but those tax cuts mean that the state got taxes from employees and other effected businesses and individuals that would have otherwise needed unemployment and other benefits. It is very likely a tax cut of that size would pay back more than its value in avoided entitlement claims and economic activity.

Do you understand the concept of inventory turns and why they are important to profitability? That's the same basic concept as supply side economics.
Click to expand...

10s or 100s of billions? I'd really like a source on that, because Its actually a number that you just made up.

I'd like to point out that corporations do not pay taxes on revenue, they pay taxes on profit. If a corporation makes $100 a year lets say $33 are wages/benefits et cetera and $33 goes to overhead such as purchasing raw material, expanding business by purchasing land or machines or software or whatever else. That leaves $34 profit that is taxed (as long as we ignore the plethora of loopholes available that allow companies to reduce taxable income).

Its up to the shareholders and CEO to decide whether to take the money as dividends/stock buybacks or defer payment and chase higher future returns by using the money to grow the business more and hiring people or maybe doing a little M&A activity as has become chic. If they reinvest that money is not taxed by the way.

Point is corporate tax rates have little effect on whether a company will hire someone or not. The only question is will that person produce more than the salary they will have to be paid and is there demand for what they will produce. As long as that is true the shareholders will make more money with them than without.

I apologize for the lack of sources, Im in a hurry and cant grab them quick. I am considering posting a well sourced thread on the topic of corporate taxes though if there would be interest. For now take a look at the following from the bureau of labor statistics. If corporate tax rate was tied to the unemployment rate we would expect a positive correlation. Instead there isnt one to speak of at all.
 

Attachments

  • corporate tax and unemployment.jpg
    corporate tax and unemployment.jpg
    30.6 KB · Views: 0
#119
#119
utgibbs said:
Several of them are, I believe, going to be paid much less than minimum wage...

Ah, the Class War. It's great to see it in such glorious Technicolor.

All stemming from a "crisis" engineered by Walker himself. Capital would collapse in a week without the vital inputs by the State.
Click to expand...

Can you name the jobs that are going to know be below minimum wage?
 
#120
#120
Specs said:
Point is corporate tax rates have little effect on whether a company will hire someone or not. The only question is will that person produce more than the salary they will have to be paid and is there demand for what they will produce. As long as that is true the shareholders will make more money with them than without.
Click to expand...

I believe the concern was more with the corporation relocating to a state with a more favorable tax situation.
 
#121
#121
Specs said:
10s or 100s of billions? I'd really like a source on that, because Its actually a number that you just made up.

I'd like to point out that corporations do not pay taxes on revenue, they pay taxes on profit. If a corporation makes $100 a year lets say $33 are wages/benefits et cetera and $33 goes to overhead such as purchasing raw material, expanding business by purchasing land or machines or software or whatever else. That leaves $34 profit that is taxed (as long as we ignore the plethora of loopholes available that allow companies to reduce taxable income).

Its up to the shareholders and CEO to decide whether to take the money as dividends/stock buybacks or defer payment and chase higher future returns by using the money to grow the business more and hiring people or maybe doing a little M&A activity as has become chic. If they reinvest that money is not taxed by the way.

Point is corporate tax rates have little effect on whether a company will hire someone or not. The only question is will that person produce more than the salary they will have to be paid and is there demand for what they will produce. As long as that is true the shareholders will make more money with them than without.

I apologize for the lack of sources, Im in a hurry and cant grab them quick. I am considering posting a well sourced thread on the topic of corporate taxes though if there would be interest. For now take a look at the following from the bureau of labor statistics. If corporate tax rate was tied to the unemployment rate we would expect a positive correlation. Instead there isnt one to speak of at all.
Click to expand...

You are forgetting to factor in the state and city income tax of the business HQ and how this will effect the top execs. This does come into play.
 
#125
#125
NEOCON said:
Aren't these the same pollsters who predicted a sweeping Dem win last fall?

Just saying.
Click to expand...

I didn't see those polls.

But as I've shown ad infinitum the split on social programs is almost universally at least 67% / 33%. Universal health care is just another example. Often, in fact, when the issues are framed concretely and debated cogently in a "citizen's jury" style atmosphere (e.g. without toothpaste men propaganda), the ratio almost always shoots to 80 / 20.

Which demonstrates we have a "taxation without representation." Extra-parliamentary action is actually REQUIRED by the US Constitution.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top