TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#33601: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:03:27 PM

It is true that 90% of it is really the senate and house of reps.

Enkufka Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ from Bay of White fish Since: Dec, 2009
Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ
#33602: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:17:34 PM

Corporate taxes are at a 40 year low.

We have the highest tax rate on paper but the amount of loopholes and ways to get around it mean that we have a corporate tax rate of 12.1%.

EDIT:... goddamit, undermined by the subscription. =.=

http://ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/2012/02/cbo_confirms_us_corporations_p.php Better one.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:18:48 PM by Enkufka

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry
Aqueos Nova here from Los Angeles Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
#33603: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:19:54 PM

[up]Yeah I have heard that. In any case it would be good to simplify tax code, it seems a tad ridiculous that you have to squeeze yourself through a loophole to get the tax rate everyone else is getting, and in the meantime you make it somewhat difficult to judge how much tax is really getting payed here.

Ugh. I mean all that really needs to be done it to adjust the rate to about what it effectively is close the loopholes and get on with it.... Actually I believe Romney proposed something to that effect.

Then again the opposite of progress is congress in some cases. The joy of trying to make partisan bills.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:24:36 PM by Aqueos

Bet you didn't see that coming
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33604: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:20:47 PM

The businesses have been so spoiled by the Bush years that any attempt to swing things back to normalcy is "attacking job creators"

Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#33605: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:25:52 PM

Any polls post-debate?

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.
Aqueos Nova here from Los Angeles Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
#33606: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:26:02 PM

[up][up]They do have a point however, in certain cases raising taxes to former levels basically does mean that you have to cut somewhere, and it may to an extent come out of jobs.

Then again of course, in the case of income tax that's less likely to have a direct effect.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:27:04 PM by Aqueos

Bet you didn't see that coming
Enkufka Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ from Bay of White fish Since: Dec, 2009
Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ
#33607: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:27:18 PM

I agree that it would be good to simplify the tax code. However, Romney's proposal boils down to "institute a 20% tax cut on all incomes, then close loopholes to make up the difference," without saying which loopholes would be removed. But even when removing all concievable loopholes, it still would not make his plan add up.

Simplifying the tax code cannot be accompanied by cutting taxes at the same time. It's counterproductive.

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry
Aqueos Nova here from Los Angeles Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
#33608: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:31:30 PM

[up]Ambiguity is the true weapon of the politician.

But that does make sense to me at least, if one is going to close loopholes and does not wish to effectively raise them, you're going to have to cut them. After all simplifying the tax code does not require taxes to effectively rise either. Of course I have a feeling that is indeed cutting taxes but I know very little about tax code other than the basic bracket structure and a few deduction possibilities so whatever.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:32:29 PM by Aqueos

Bet you didn't see that coming
ch00beh ??? from Who Knows Where Since: Jul, 2010
???
#33609: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:32:43 PM

I like how people assume that the majority of corporate profits go to execs so they can roll around in a hot tub full of benjamins rather than going to the company itself so that it can expand and/or optimize.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33610: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:35:02 PM

Because we'd have seen some expansion or optimization from the Bush tax cuts.

Aqueos Nova here from Los Angeles Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
#33611: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:35:21 PM

Again that is an important point, profit is indeed what lets business grow, and a growing business means more jobs which means more money which means more employed people and such.

Some CEO's get a lot, but on the other hand considering how much corporations make period /: Eh... it's not totally terrible.

[up]We're in a recession you know, results are not always immediately tangible, take the stimulus and the supposed effect it had.

[down]Things happen, if one sticks one's foot in one's mouth at the correct time everything goes to hell.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:37:53 PM by Aqueos

Bet you didn't see that coming
Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#33612: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:36:44 PM

Romney will win Florida. Obama will win Ohio.

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33613: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:37:36 PM

[up][up]

Which would be fine, yet at the same time the Republicans keep bitching about the deficit, something the tax cuts are a big contributor to.

We can't cut something intangible like that, but we can cut something very important to a lot of people like schools and medicare?

edited 18th Oct '12 9:38:02 PM by Thorn14

Aqueos Nova here from Los Angeles Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
#33614: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:38:43 PM

[up]They wish to cut social services in and help private enterprise as opposed to the opposite. The argument that this will grow the economy hence bringing in more money is valid.

But no, corporate tax rates are not invisible, what I'm trying to say is that the effect isn't apparent as we have nothing to compare it to.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:39:29 PM by Aqueos

Bet you didn't see that coming
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33615: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:39:43 PM

At what cost?

Enkufka Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ from Bay of White fish Since: Dec, 2009
Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ
#33616: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:45:53 PM

Aqueous, the bush tax cuts were in 2001. The claim made (after the cuts went into effect, when they were made, they were simply to slow down the surplus) is that the tax cuts would boost the economy enough to make more money under the lowered tax cuts.

That did not happen. And in fact, tax cuts, dollar for dollar, make the least amount of economic growth. For every dollar spent on, for instance, making the Bush tax cuts permanant, 32 cents of economic boost would occur. Compare any other option on there.

I also want to say, Corporate tax rates are on Net income. Profits used on maintaining or expanding, basically using money on the corporation itself, is not taxed.

Also going to add that most of the stimulus was tax cuts.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:53:10 PM by Enkufka

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry
ch00beh ??? from Who Knows Where Since: Jul, 2010
???
#33617: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:50:02 PM

Because we'd have seen some expansion or optimization from the Bush tax cuts.

here's a chart of the vanguard small cap index fund of all time. As a little bit of background, index funds essentially represent the aggregate wealth of whatever market it represents—in this case, it's small business.

You can see the growth and fall before 2002 due to the dot com bubble. Bush tax cuts get instated 2001 and 2003, and in 2003 we see another sharp increase in growth of small business.

You can't really say that there's any particular causation here, but it is interesting to see that under Bush, the boom and bust cycles were much greater than in the 90s.

edited 18th Oct '12 9:51:04 PM by ch00beh

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33618: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:53:12 PM

If the Republicans didn't raise such a tiffy about the deficit I concede maybe keeping them.

But its "CUT THE DEFICIT" "Alright lets cut the military, end the bush tax cuts, and raise revenue" "ANYTHING BUT THAT. BUT CUT THE DEFICIT!"

ohsointocats from The Sand Wastes Since: Oct, 2011 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#33619: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:57:14 PM

Er, I'm pretty sure greater boom and bust cycles are not a good thing.

Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#33620: Oct 18th 2012 at 9:59:21 PM

Hasn't that chart also shown the economy is doing much better since the crash?

ch00beh ??? from Who Knows Where Since: Jul, 2010
???
#33621: Oct 18th 2012 at 10:02:25 PM

^if there's one thing you can be sure of after reading all charts, it's that over a long period of time, the market always recovers to pre-crash levels and that it will show overall growth.

so yes, it does show that, but that's to be expected. This is why I mentioned you can't really point to something and shout CAUSATION!!! but you can look at local trends and stuff.

^^it's great if you know how to time those boom and bust cycles. hint: just about no one can.

edited 18th Oct '12 10:04:18 PM by ch00beh

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
storyyeller More like giant cherries from Appleloosa Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
#33622: Oct 18th 2012 at 10:04:14 PM

I think the automakers have repaid it. Dunno about the banks/insurance companies.

Actually it was the other way around.

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#33623: Oct 18th 2012 at 10:09:36 PM

For the record: If the firm capitalizes, that is not an expense. If the firm has 0 dollars in net cash flow, but it increased its assets by spending a kerbillion dollars on factory equipment or the like, it will be taxed on its improved fiscal position.

By the same token, however, if the firm made 10 million dollars but oh-no, all that factory equipment disintegrate (depreciation), then they actually may well have a zero or negative net profit, because their assets have decreased.

What is true is that money the firm pays in dividends gets taxed as income after the corporate tax rate-that is, the people who receive dividends end up paying taxes, despite that the corporation already paid the corporate tax. But that's the entire point-it's the tradeoff of being a corporation, what with the limited liability and the like.

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#33624: Oct 19th 2012 at 12:16:01 AM

According to an interview, Romney's son, Tagg wanted to punch Obama in the face after Obama called Romney a liar in the second debate.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#33625: Oct 19th 2012 at 12:31:35 AM

[up] I am convinced that Romney's sons aren't his sons - they're his clones. cool

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.

Total posts: 417,856
Top