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
Ideally we should lower taxes on everyone and increase spending (I am old school I know)
But I refuse to support a system that taxes the rich more than then rest, proportionally.
Also, higher taxes on the rich in certain sense, if done corectly, can actually stimulate the economy since it takes money that would otherwise remain unspend, and put it back into the economy at large.
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Oh yeah, drones causing civilian casualties. That's a very good point, though it seems Obama is leaning on the pragmatic side on this one. Besides, the sad fact is that first-world leaders never seem to concern themselves with "limited" civilian casualties from such military operations in backwater third world countries, no matter how frequent they are, as long as its done by unmanned vehicles and cannot be proven to have been done deliberately or through criminal negligence (and even then, who would prosecute them? How many of the US soldiers who committed serious crimes during the occupation of Iraq had been properly punished?).
edited 3rd Jan '13 6:52:08 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Serocco: I'm not sure if that was an insult, if the person lied, or if they just didn't realize what they were looking at. I could take that statement a number of ways so I'm not going to immediately assume it's offensive.
Marq: I still don't see how having soldiers around leads to fewer civilian casualties. If anything it would lead to more since the terrorists could hire them to use in attacks or get them caught in the line of fire during attacks.
@Kostya: But when they take money to fight American soldiers, then they stop being civilians and become enemy combatants, don't they?
edited 3rd Jan '13 7:00:10 PM by OhnoaBear
"The marvel is not that the Bear posts well, but that the Bear posts at all."@Kostya.
Well, my rudementary economic knowladge comes from my Introduction to Economics course and my Economic course.
So, according to Keynesian tought we should put more money into the economy when we are in a recession and take money out of the econmy when there is too much inflation (I know this is not a very detailed explanation).
So, in a recession or a near recession like the one we are in right now, the ideal thing should be to put more money into the economy and foster inflation. To do this goverments will usually, trough monetary policy, lower ibntersts rates and pritn money (sell government debt), and trough fiscal policy will embark in large scale public spending. As an aditional measure, taxes should be lowered in order for people to have more money to spend.
Now, when you take a poor or a middle class person, where in many instances I am sure you will be aware they dont save their money. If they want a Tv they buy it even if the have to go on debt to do so. As a result all the money that they receive goes back into the economy and this is generally seen as a good thing (do it will eventually destroy the world, thank you capitalism!).
Rich people are different because, a mayority of them actually have a lot of money saved up. This is called liquidity if I am correct. This meaning that they have actual cash in the bank (fun fact, only 7% of the world's cash is in paper, the rest is electronic).
So a rich person doesnt spends all his income but actually saves a part of it (and the richer he is, the more he well tend to save in proporsion to what he takes in).
So what happens to all his money that is left there in the bank? Well nothing happens. They get money from the interests the banks pay them. If there is a deflation the money the rich people have becomes more valuable (if they dont have it in the bank of course) and if there is inflation all the money the rich people have (weather is in the bank or not) becomes less valuable (but if the rich have a lot of assets then they will also benefit, in other words, its very easy to stay rich once you are rich). This is why the rich people hate inflation more than normal people would even do it would appear that it would affect everybody in the same measure.
Now if you tax people and then spend the money you raise from said revenue, then your actually taking that money which is stagnant and putting it back in the economy, so even if the rich people cut back on their spending because of the tax hikes the economy is still getting stimulated (this will only happen in certain situations do).
This is why its more important to cut taxes on poorer people than on the rich, because if you tax the poor more and then spend their money you arent stimulating the economy, with all the negative effects higehr taxation entails, where as if you tax the rich, this negative effects basically come down to a lot of fancy people complaining.
So if the rich dont spend their money, you sort of have to spend it for them (I think I heard a million republican screams go off in my head at once).
edited 3rd Jan '13 7:08:39 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Politico posted a pretty compelling article that delves a bit deeper into Obama's mindset,
At its core, they revealed a quote confirming that he's most concerned about appearing bipartisan
and/or centrist over all else.
Thanks to Obama's deal, the estate taxes were cut from 55% to 40%, and those who make 5 million+ are exempt from estate taxes.
No, people whose estate is worth 5 million or less are exempt from the estate tax.
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Remember Baehner's disastrous Plan B idea?
He actually told Obama about it before it was revealed to Congress. Baehner admitted that he didn't expect Plan B the Senate. He figured that it would've been downgraded to about 500,000 instead of 1 million.
That happened almost exactly as Baehner thought it would. It was knocked down to 450,000, which was implemented in the final Fiscal Cliff deal.
Obama, perplexed by the secret idea, told Baehner if he shared Plan B with Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi, suggesting that they might've helped him into making Plan B. Baehner said no.
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.

A drone pilot had to quit after he killed a child
and his boss said "No, that was a dog".
edited 3rd Jan '13 6:45:54 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.