Carson's got his flat tithing thing, but he won't commit to 10%, 15% or some other number. No analysis of Fiorina's magic 3-page tax plan, either (seriously, how do candidates get away with that sort of nonsense?)

 

For whatever reason, they haven't released a detailed analysis of Kasich's plan yet. Maybe because it's relatively new? I think he just released it a couple of weeks ago. His plan looks superficially similar to Bush's, though, so that might be a point of comparison. You can find their publications here. They're a conservative think tank generally in favor of cutting taxes, so if anything they're going to be putting a positive light on the policy implications.

 

Re: tax cuts for the rich, absolutely. There's no reason that a tax plan would need to be structured that way. Want to give everyone a tax cut but focus it on the middle income group? Just cut the rates on the middle income tax brackets. Everyone who gets to that bracket or higher would see a cut. Another example was how Republicans really fought against continuing the payroll tax cuts a couple of years ago, cuts that primarily benefit wage earners and not the wealthy.

 

edit: one thing this chart doesn't show is the gigantic crater these proposals would blow in the federal budget, especially the crazier ones like Cruz and Carson.

Edited November 11, 201510 yr by StrangeSox

No Carson and his flat tithing? No Kasich?

 

And yeah, these guys are all about the tax cuts for the rich. They love to talk about how taxes are killing American jobs and American economy... meanwhile, tax rates for the highest earners are less than half what they were for decades of strong American economic growth.

 

MAN f*** THESE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES.

Single issue voters have to be the ones supporting the GOP. I can't for the life of me think how any level headed person can support some of these ideals they dole out. Cut taxes, cut programs, but invest more in the military complex? Give more breaks to the wealthy?

Single issue voters have to be the ones supporting the GOP. I can't for the life of me think how any level headed person can support some of these ideals they dole out. Cut taxes, cut programs, but invest more in the military complex? Give more breaks to the wealthy?

 

It's absolutely mind boggling to me as well. I'm sure a lot of has to do with their religious views; they think they will go to hell if they support those baby killing, homo accepting liberals.

Almost as mind blowing as how anyone could support Bernie Sanders.

Almost as mind blowing as how anyone could support Bernie Sanders.

 

/green?

Definitely not green

I'm not thrilled with the democratic candidates but I still subscribe to a least harm voting policy.

The democratic years have really killed our economy. Learned today health care at our company costs rise 35 f***ing percent for individuals and 50 percent for dependents. This country is screwed. If you are lucky enough to get a job that pays anything halfway noteable, good luck keeping a nickle because of health care costs. We're in sorry shape economically folks. No jobs available that pay anything, candidates talking about making people work til they are 72, give me a break!!!

Yeah our economy is really in the toilet again, just like the end of Clinton's presidency. Thank God we had eight years of strong leadership and growth under the Republicans, otherwise we'd probably be at 50% unemployment.

 

Your company is using health care premiums as a way to cut your pay. The ones loudly protesting higher wages are Republicans. The ones trying to abolish social security or keep raising the retirement age are Republicans.

Edited November 12, 201510 yr by StrangeSox

The democratic years have really killed our economy. Learned today health care at our company costs rise 35 f***ing percent for individuals and 50 percent for dependents. This country is screwed. If you are lucky enough to get a job that pays anything halfway noteable, good luck keeping a nickle because of health care costs. We're in sorry shape economically folks. No jobs available that pay anything, candidates talking about making people work til they are 72, give me a break!!!

You must have been all-in with tinkle down economics, even though it's been demonstrably proven false.

Almost as mind blowing as how anyone could support Bernie Sanders.

In terms of implications for the budget, this is definitely true. One side wants massive tax cuts, the other massive spending increases.

 

Where the similarity ends though - and this is one of the two primary reasons I went from lean-right to lean-left over the years - is that the GOP wants to further open the gap between rich and poor, and actually do much more for the rich. Frankly, they don't need that help. I'm not saying raise taxes on them either, certainly not a lot, but giving them new tax cuts will do nothing to help the economy and meanwhile increase the problem we already have.

 

Also worth noting, Sanders is out there saying he wants more spending and to protect more people with lesser incomes. Some of the GOP candidates are saying they are the crusaders for poor and middle class, while their plans are the opposite. So, while I don't think Sanders would be a good President and wouldn't vote for him, he is more honest.

 

In terms of implications for the budget, this is definitely true. One side wants massive tax cuts, the other massive spending increases.

 

I think Bernie's proposed tax increases as well as cuts to military spending to fund his programs, not entirely sure though.

 

You must have been all-in with tinkle down economics, even though it's been demonstrably proven false.

Greg's been pretty vocal about how terrible Gov. Brownback has been for the state of Kansas in the past.

Yeah our economy is really in the toilet again, just like the end of Clinton's presidency. Thank God we had eight years of strong leadership and growth under the Republicans, otherwise we'd probably be at 50% unemployment.

 

Your company is using health care premiums as a way to cut your pay. The ones loudly protesting higher wages are Republicans. The ones trying to abolish social security or keep raising the retirement age are Republicans.

 

We were actually at the start of a recession at the end of the Clinton Presidency. It officially started 6 weeks after GWB took office.

We were actually at the start of a recession at the end of the Clinton Presidency. It officially started 6 weeks after GWB took office.

Yup, that was the Tech Wreck. Relatively shallow, until 9/11 gave it a big shove.

 

The recovery during W's administration was of course an empty bubble drive entirely by falsely boosted home equity, as we now all know. But then again, many of the policies that caused the housing bubble came from Clinton's time, with furtherance added by Bush (though for both of them, they were only part of the puzzle, with Congress just as guilty).

 

I think the recovery we've been in for the past 3-4 years is the first fundamental one we've seen since the mid-to-late 90s. But even this one hasn't driven wages up as well ones prior to 2000.

 

Yup, that was the Tech Wreck. Relatively shallow, until 9/11 gave it a big shove.

 

The recovery during W's administration was of course an empty bubble drive entirely by falsely boosted home equity, as we now all know. But then again, many of the policies that caused the housing bubble came from Clinton's time, with furtherance added by Bush (though for both of them, they were only part of the puzzle, with Congress just as guilty).

 

I think the recovery we've been in for the past 3-4 years is the first fundamental one we've seen since the mid-to-late 90s. But even this one hasn't driven wages up as well ones prior to 2000.

 

I honestly believe with no inflation, no wage growth, and low labor force participation rate, this isn't a real recovery either. It is pretty much been launched by government spending, and maintained by the fed bank, and consumer material deflation giving more money for spending.

 

It really bothers me that after 7 years, the market thinks the US economy still isn't in good enough shape to survive without zero interest rates.

The market thought the US economy was doing amazingly well in 2007, though. How much do we rely on that collective wisdom?

 

I do agree that this long, protracted recovery hasn't been great for everyone, and the economy was sliding downward at the end of Clinton's presidency (it both shot up and then slid down mainly because of tech, not anything caused by Clinton really).

Politics are just depressing. It seems like our country has dug itself into a colossal hole and only special people have the tools to climb out.

 

We should just have robot overlords because humans just can't get it done.

The market thought the US economy was doing amazingly well in 2007, though. How much do we rely on that collective wisdom?

 

I do agree that this long, protracted recovery hasn't been great for everyone, and the economy was sliding downward at the end of Clinton's presidency (it both shot up and then slid down mainly because of tech, not anything caused by Clinton really).

 

I used to believe more it the effect of the Presidency, but with each passing recession the Fed takes more and more of the leading role in the recovery effort. It becomes more and more artificial.

I honestly believe with no inflation, no wage growth, and low labor force participation rate, this isn't a real recovery either. It is pretty much been launched by government spending, and maintained by the fed bank, and consumer material deflation giving more money for spending.

 

It really bothers me that after 7 years, the market thinks the US economy still isn't in good enough shape to survive without zero interest rates.

The bolded have begun improving much more lately, they weren't at first. But I agree that, as I said, we haven't seen a really solid, fundamental, across-the-board recovery since the 90's. And that one wasn't really effected much by any President.

 

I do think Bush and Clinton share a good chunk of the of blame for the housing bubble and Great Recession that followed.

 

Their policies helped enable it, but it was still the combo of mortgage companies, investment banks, ratings agencies and insurance companies that built the house of cards so high.

 

FWIW I just came across this on real wage growth:

 

 

Why Jeffrey Lacker Is Worried About Inflation

 

....There’s this confusion about real and nominal that I think infects the discussion, particularly of wages and slack. Real wages have accelerated over the last year because inflation has fallen and the rate of gain in nominal wages hasn’t changed much. The wage pressures we’ve been hearing about, they show up in the macro data as real wage pressures.

 

And the historical evidence suggests that there’s some lag before things accelerate as you reduce slack significantly. In 1966-67, we had unemployment at 5 percent, we pushed it to 4, and it was 1967 and 1968 when inflation took off. So there was a significant lag in the way that relationship seems to have worked in the past.

 

Edited November 12, 201510 yr by StrangeSox

University of Illinois Pays $875,000 to Settle Salaita Case

 

Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel Loevy & Loevy announced the settlement of Professor Steven Salaita’s case against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) for firing him from his tenured position over his personal tweets criticizing the Israeli government’s assault on Gaza in 2014. Professor Salaita sued UIUC, the university Board of Trustees and high-level administrators for violating his First Amendment right to free speech and for breach of contract. Salaita’s firing became a flashpoint for debates over academic freedom, free speech, and the repression of Palestinian rights advocacy. In exchange for Professor Salaita’s agreement to release his claims, the university has agreed to pay $875,000.

Their policies helped enable it, but it was still the combo of mortgage companies, investment banks, ratings agencies and insurance companies that built the house of cards so high.

 

FWIW I just came across this on real wage growth:

 

 

Why Jeffrey Lacker Is Worried About Inflation

This is the rubber band I've been talking about for 5 years here. Once the more rapid economic acceleration started (which is really just recently), there will be a snap-back and inflation will rise, with all this money the government poured in. That's when Fed Policy would kick in and raise the rates, which I think is coming very soon.

 

The danger is, was there TOO much money added, and therefore the Fed won't be able to have enough bandwidth to correct without decimating the loan market. I was more concerned about that danger 3-4 years ago than I am now, but I still have concerns.

 

I still can't believe some of you argue that Democrats are more right than Republicans & vice versa. Shame on you. Hillary Clinton is about to be our President. Holy f***ing s*** balls. We're officially a joke.