Why do we need tax cuts?

[Lomasexual]

Puerto Rico got rid of their corporate tax breaks in 2006..

This helped them correct?

How is that relevant in any way to what I was talking about?

Please keep on topic. Jumping on random tangents just to beat some obsessive political drum makes for worthless posts.

[Scipio2009]

I'll entertain that question if you can challenge my earlier points without fallacy, or you go ahead and just finally concede they are indeed factual.

Reading through the bull****, it's clear that you can't point to a single one, lol. Waste of time

[1bad65]

Reading through the bull****, it's clear that you can't point to a single one, lol. Waste of time

I don't do one-way discourse.

I've addressed all of your previous points and questions.

It's now your turn to do the same with mine.

I see once the spotlight is on you, you fold.

[Scipio2009]

Anytime we trade with countries with similar labor laws.
But corporations and politicians have undercut that by forcing companies to adhere to labor laws in America, but allow them thru trade acts like nafta to use cheap labor not protected by labor laws..
So Americans lose jobs to countries with no or inferior labor laws..

Nafta absolutely wrecked our middle class


Nafta would be fine if it was Canada n US.. add in a train wreck like Mexico and it ruins everything.

Will have to agree to disagree. Lowering the cost of goods to the American people is almost always a good thing. And, on balance, a good thing for workers too, imo (farmers/ranchers do well, US is able to sell more high-margin product into more markets, US best-of-breed products significantly expand unit counts as more markets are opened up, etc).

Then again, that takes things into a far deeper conversation.

[Scipio2009]

I don't do one-way discourse.

I've addressed all of your previous points and questions.

It's now your turn to do the same with mine.

I see once the spotlight is on you, you fold.

Except you haven't. President W Bush and the Congresses that were with him took a federal budget that was in good shape (can quibble over whether Clinton's budgets were balanced all you want), passed a whole bunch of structural changes to the federal budget, and yet you've continued to insist that that instantly became the burden of President Obama, without waiver. lol

That simple point, nevermind your blatant refusal to acknowledge the undoing of most of Reagan's tax cuts within a year of their signing, shows you for who you are; a believer who can't or won't cogently try to defend what they claim to think and believe.

No issues with the spotlight on this end; have answered every question and every attempt by you to pick as well; anyone who looks through the conversation will see that.

They will also see your inability to defend your own words.

[1bad65]

Except you haven't.

You're stupidity, or obtuseness, isn't my problem.

I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make it drink.

President W Bush and the Congresses that were with him took a federal budget that was in good shape (can quibble over whether Clinton's budgets were balanced all you want), passed a whole bunch of structural changes to the federal budget,

I've previously agreed that Bush (and the Democrats running Congress) spent like drunken sailors.

Please, move on from that.

E
and yet you've continued to insist that that instantly became the burden of President Obama, without waiver. lol

False

I've blamed Obama for his over spending, just as I blamed Bush for his. And the fact is Obama did spend more than Bush did.

That's called consistency. Try it sometime.

E
That simple point, nevermind your blatant refusal to acknowledge the undoing of most of Reagan's tax cuts within a year of their signing,

That is false, accirding to YOUR own source.

SOME, not MOST were repealed. Your source also pointed out many of the ones repealed hadn't even taken effect.

E
shows you for who you are; a believer who can't or won't cogently try to defend what they claim to think and believe.

Speak for yourself while using fallacy and attrition tactics.

They will also see your inability to defend your own words.

I always defend, or retract, my own words.

Words I didn't say, I dont of course.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

How is that relevant in any way to what I was talking about?

Please keep on topic. Jumping on random tangents just to beat some obsessive political drum makes for worthless posts.

It's relevant because we are talking about tax cuts, and how you think the corporate tax breaks only help the wealthy.

When I asked how the ending of corporate tax breaks in Puerto Rico helped their people, you get mad, instead of answering my question.


How did ending the corporate tax breaks in 2006 help the people of Puerto Rico? What was the result of that policy ending?

These are absolute legit questions to ask in a tax cut thread, and it's preposterous of you to claim they aren't reasonable questions.

[Lomasexual]

It's relevant because we are talking about tax cuts, and how you think the corporate tax breaks only help the wealthy.

When I asked how the ending of corporate tax breaks in Puerto Rico helped their people, you get mad, instead of answering my question.


How did ending the corporate tax breaks in 2006 help the people of Puerto Rico? What was the result of that policy ending?

These are absolute legit questions to ask in a tax cut thread, and it's preposterous of you to claim they aren't reasonable questions.

Go read up on the Laffer curve, my economically illiterate friend.

Then re-read what I posted, so that you can try to comprehend what I was saying.

If you can't comprehend what I wrote, then just fuck off. I'm not interested in your obsessive political bullshit or your attempts to drag my posts into your gay cheerleading.

I'll 'just answer your question' when you demonstrate that you comprehend what I am saying. Until then, your just acting like a whiny little cunt.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Go read up on the Laffer curve, my economically illiterate friend.

Then re-read what I posted, so that you can try to comprehend what I was saying.

If you can't comprehend what I wrote, then just fuck off. I'm not interested in your obsessive political bullshit or your attempts to drag my posts into your gay cheerleading.

I'll 'just answer your question' when you demonstrate that you comprehend what I am saying. Until then, your just acting like a whiny little cunt.

So you won't answer my question?

[Lomasexual]

So you won't answer my question?

Sure I will - the second you demonstrate that you comprehend what I said.

Since you not only will not - but are both intellectually and ethically incapable of - demonstrating that, you will probably be waiting a while.