Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(12-17-2016, 07:58 AM)Mikebert Wrote: Warren Dew Wrote:Suppose the plumber is in a 35% marginal tax bracket, state plus federal. He charges $100 per hour, and takes home $65 per hour.
The proposal is to cut tax rates at all brackets. If the marginal tax rate is being cut by three-sevenths so are the lower rates. So I will treat the tax cut as being applied to average tax rates.
So working 2000 hrs a year he grosses 200K and keeps 130K under the current system.
Quote:Now reduce his marginal tax rate to 20%.
Now his take home is 160K
You're making several incorrect assumptions there. This case can still be illustrated assuming cuts to a flat (not average) income tax rate, somewhat as you suppose, and your rather high number for billable hours, but it's hard to accept that you're arguing in good faith when you set up so many straw men.
Quote:Quote:Now he can charge $90 per hour - less than before - while taking home $72 per hour
This gives him a take home income of 144K. Why would he take a 16K pay cut for the same work?
He's not taking a pay cut. He's bidding on work from me, which I won't pay $100 per hour for. He does not - initially - cut the rate for his existing customers. And in fact, plumbers have many different categories of customers and charge them different rates, though in this case we just have to realize that bids on new business may be different than rates on existing business.
Of course, because of the competitive free market, other plumbers can now make money undercutting his rates on his existing customers, too. So the equilibrium rate will be less than $100/hour, but more than $80/hour. The equilibrium average rate will still be in the range of $90/hour, just as in my original example.
The only way the plumber could keep his average rate at $100/hour is by forming a cartel with all other plumbers and agreeing not to undercut each other. That's illegal, not to mention unrealistic.
Quote:Quote:With a 10% discount, I have an incentive finally to hire him to do the bathroom work I've been putting off.
Yeah sure, but where’s his incentive?
The error you are making ...
Hopefully you can now see that the error was not mine. I was merely trying to illustrate the equilibrium economics equations with an example.
I might at most have been making an error in assuming that you would understand that the illustrative example was representative of market economics operating to come to a new equilibrium in a competitive many plumber, many customer situation.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
01-09-2017, 03:34 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2017, 03:39 AM by Eric the Green.)
(01-09-2017, 12:36 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (12-15-2016, 06:02 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (12-15-2016, 12:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (12-14-2016, 03:01 PM)playwrite Wrote: (12-08-2016, 11:01 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: No, it's demand side stimulus that subsidizes employers, not supply side stimulus.
Consumers create demand both directly and indirectly (business spend to better meet consumer demand).
By far, most consumers are employees, not employers.
You've really got twisted up somewhere along the way. Go back, start again, and stay as far away from the Zero Hedge types as you possible can!
By far the biggest consumer is the federal government. If you think the government is an "employee", your definitions are seriously off base.
Most government workers are employees. They are all employees of the people. Somebody even pays the president's salary. But no doubt he's an employer too, himself. He hires and fires thousands of people. I guess Trump has had some virtual practice at that job.
It's not government employees that are buying the tanks, it's the government as an organization.
Quote:There's no doubt at all that when the Tea Party fired thousands of government workers in 2011, it slowed the recovery to a crawl. That gave Romney his slogan. This policy was deliberate on the part of the Republicans. Slow the recovery so that Obama would not be re-elected. McConnell made that specific promise.
And yet, 2011 is when the unemployment rate finally started coming down again, after going up every year under Pelosi's House leadership.
NO, it was 2010 when it started to come down, and it was due to Pelosi's and Obama's leadership in providing the stimulus package of 2009. Only that saved us from the abyss. In only 6 months, the plunge stopped and recovery began.
Republicans slowed down the recovery in 2011 by firing government workers, at all levels of government. This was done deliberately so Romney could run against a sluggish economy.
Since that's all that the Republicans accomplished from 2011 to 2017, it's amazing that you can attribute the decline in unemployment to what they did, rather than to Obama's stimulus.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(12-11-2016, 06:27 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (12-11-2016, 04:33 PM)Mikebert Wrote: Warren Dew Wrote:From the standpoint of desirability, as discussed at the links I provided, we need to start with the need to increase the labor force participation rate, or at least keep it from decreasing any faster than necessary, to maintain living standards. As discussed at the links I provided, that involves either or both of increasing incentives to work or reducing subsidies for not working.
The obvious way to increase incentives to work is to reduce income tax rates. Past a certain point, reductions in income tax rates will increase the deficit and thus the debt. That's a reason increased debt would be desirable.
This makes no sense. You give an example of a plumber who if you cut his taxes, we will be incented to lower his prices to drum up more business (i.e. more hours). That is if you subsidize the plumber so that he can maintain his standard of living while working for less money per hour, he will opt to do this. Why? Why not just use the extra income from the tax cut to pay down debt, sock more away for retirement, pay for the kid’s college or increase his standard of living? Why would he choose to work more to less money (per hour)? Would YOU do that?
Why in the world do you think he's making less money? Do you understand the difference between cutting his taxes and cutting his tax rate? They aren't synonymous.
Since words aren't working, let's use numbers. Suppose the plumber is in a 35% marginal tax bracket, state plus federal. He charges $100 per hour, and takes home $65 per hour.
Now reduce his marginal tax rate to 20%. Now he can charge $90 per hour - less than before - while taking home $72 per hour - more than before. With a 10% discount, I have an incentive finally to hire him to do the bathroom work I've been putting off. With him making 11% more per hour, he has an incentive to schedule me in addition to his other work, working more hours.
Would I do that? Absolutely I would do that.
Galen, if you are reading this, can I ask a question, since you know people here a lot better than I do? Is there any chance of getting Mikebert to understand supply curves and demand curves and how they interact? Obviously he's not going to understand supply side economics without understanding how the supply curve acts.
Tax cuts do not stimulate the economy. Analysts have shown that most of the benefit of Trump tax cuts would go to the wealthy, and the middle class would pay more. Tax cuts by Bush only produced the most sluggish economy ever. Tax cuts by Reagan only helped the wealthiest Americans get rich, while 90% of the people saw their wealth and income stagnate or decline. Tax cuts by Trump would have to depart significantly from the Reagan-Bush model. Instead, it doubles down, and he has hired a bunch of greedy, exploitive, rich trickle-downers and robber barons to carry out his plan.
The rich do not spend their tax cuts back into the economy. They buy luxuries for themselves, and use their wealth for outsourcing, buy outs, automation and speculation. None of it trickles down.
As the economy continues to automate, globalize and outsource under neo-liberalism, with less social government support, fewer people will have the income they need to keep the economy going. Your plumber would lose customers under neo-liberal economics, and thus have to raise his rates and perhaps go out of business.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
01-23-2017, 04:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-23-2017, 04:43 PM by Galen.)
I think this sums up what is happening to Obozo's legacy.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Obama-- best president since JFK and early LBJ.
(now, that's not saying a whole heck of a lot....)
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-23-2017, 04:36 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Obama-- best president since JFK and early LBJ.
(now, that's not saying a whole heck of a lot....)
LBJ was a complete disaster but then again if destroying things is your goal then I can see why you think Obozo was a good idea. Come to think of it LBJ was bombing the shit out of people too.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 198
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2016
01-24-2017, 01:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-24-2017, 01:51 PM by The Wonkette.)
(01-23-2017, 04:45 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:36 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Obama-- best president since JFK and early LBJ.
(now, that's not saying a whole heck of a lot....)
LBJ was a complete disaster but then again if destroying things is your goal then I can see why you think Obozo was a good idea. Come to think of it LBJ was bombing the shit out of people too.
Not if you or your parents enjoy Medicare or Medicaid or you are an African American southerner who is enjoying the right to vote.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-24-2017, 01:50 PM)The Wonkette Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:45 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:36 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Obama-- best president since JFK and early LBJ.
(now, that's not saying a whole heck of a lot....)
LBJ was a complete disaster but then again if destroying things is your goal then I can see why you think Obozo was a good idea. Come to think of it LBJ was bombing the shit out of people too.
Not if you or your parents enjoy Medicare or Medicaid or you are an African American southerner who is enjoying the right to vote.
Come to think of it LBJ's Great Society programs have been pretty destructive too. Subsidizing dysfunctional behavior leads to more of it which is a trend that has become more pronounced in the last fifty years.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
01-24-2017, 08:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2017, 11:39 AM by Eric the Green.)
(01-24-2017, 01:50 PM)The Wonkette Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:45 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:36 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Obama-- best president since JFK and early LBJ.
(now, that's not saying a whole heck of a lot....)
LBJ was a complete disaster but then again if destroying things is your goal then I can see why you think Obozo was a good idea. Come to think of it LBJ was bombing the shit out of people too.
Not if you or your parents enjoy Medicare or Medicaid or you are an African American southerner who is enjoying the right to vote.
And many other things. Of course I also protested against the Vietnam War, so that's why I wrote early LBJ. Yes, I supported destroying the boss and racist economy that existed to some extent before LBJ, and which is being brought back on steroids under Dumpf. But Galen supports everything that is the most cruel and selfish.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(01-24-2017, 02:16 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Here is who I miss, thus far, based on Trump's "style points" and apparent direction. Of course it is still very early. Any who, here goes:
- Nixon
- Ford
- Reagan
- Bush 41
- Clinton
- Bush 43
- Obama
I'm not quite at the point of adding Carter. We'll see if I add him later. That would be the max, since I can't remember much of LBJ since I was only 5 years old when Nixon got elected.
Carter was certainly better than most of the other mediocrities between LBJ and Obama, and certainly better than the Dumpf Grumpf. Chumpf is already the worst ever, at the worst possible time. That's just why Galen likes him. The worst are attracted to the worst.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-24-2017, 08:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Carter was certainly better than most of the other mediocrities between LBJ and Obama, and certainly better than the Dumpf Grumpf. Chumpf is already the worst ever, at the worst possible time. That's just why Galen likes him. The worst are attracted to the worst.
I see the Donald as the least bad of the available choices because, lets face it, he is no libertarian. That said, I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
I've definitely seen my 8 year old acting that way toward my 4 year old - just to put things in perspective.
Posts: 3,956
Threads: 11
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 11:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
I've definitely seen my 8 year old acting that way toward my 4 year old - just to put things in perspective.
I don't see it as that much age dependent. An extreme partisan will be able to convince himself that anything that matches his world view is fine and smooth and dandy, while anything that conflicts will be frustrating and trigger highly emotional rejection. From where I'm sitting, watching lots of folks sitting in their little self enclosed alternate realities, unable to perceive anything outside their bubbles, is anything but entertaining. It's tragic and dangerous.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(01-23-2017, 04:15 PM)Galen Wrote: I think this sums up what is happening to Obozo's legacy.
Assume the honor will be returned in due time.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
Not really, because I consider that to be a worst case scenario which you should have picked up from the language I used. I really do consider unwinding Obozo's idiocy, you probably think of it as a legacy, to be a very worthwhile goal.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 12:56 PM)David Horn Wrote: (01-23-2017, 04:15 PM)Galen Wrote: I think this sums up what is happening to Obozo's legacy.
Assume the honor will be returned in due time.
I suspect that Trump will get quite a few things through Congress which will be rather more lasting than executive orders.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 04:30 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
Not really, because I consider that to be a worst case scenario which you should have picked up from the language I used. I really do consider unwinding Obozo's idiocy, you probably think of it as a legacy, to be a very worthwhile goal.
If you were really a Libertarian, as opposed to merely an edgy contrarian who likes "sticking it to the libtards", you would be siding with us to defend Liberalism (in the broad sense) and Liberal Democracy against Trump and the Alt-Right.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(01-25-2017, 05:15 PM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 04:30 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
Not really, because I consider that to be a worst case scenario which you should have picked up from the language I used. I really do consider unwinding Obozo's idiocy, you probably think of it as a legacy, to be a very worthwhile goal.
If you were really a Libertarian, as opposed to merely an edgy contrarian who likes "sticking it to the libtards", you would be siding with us to defend Liberalism (in the broad sense) and Liberal Democracy against Trump and the Alt-Right.
The current incarnation of liberalism is a joke and a bad one at that. Like the founders I am not a fan of unlimited democracy but rather a democratic republic with very limited powers delegated to the government. The democrats tried to give us Hillary, possibly one of the most corrupt people in politics, or Bernie who calls himself a socialist but thought communism was a really neat idea back in the day. I have less problems with Trump than with what passes for liberalism these days.
All I would have gotten is more of the same thing as sixteen years. At that point I may as well support Trump.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(01-25-2017, 05:15 PM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 04:30 PM)Galen Wrote: (01-25-2017, 08:08 AM)Odin Wrote: (01-25-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote: I must admit that watching the libtards go insane is a very nice bonus. At the very least it will be a very entertaining four to eight years depending on how events unfold.
This is the attitude of a 12yo, not a grown adult.
Not really, because I consider that to be a worst case scenario which you should have picked up from the language I used. I really do consider unwinding Obozo's idiocy, you probably think of it as a legacy, to be a very worthwhile goal.
If you were really a Libertarian, as opposed to merely an edgy contrarian who likes "sticking it to the libtards", you would be siding with us to defend Liberalism (in the broad sense) and Liberal Democracy against Trump and the Alt-Right.
"Liberal Democracy", as in the UK Liberal Democrat party, is a fusion of two largely incompatible platforms for political convenience. The two platforms came from the former "Liberal" party, which was essentially what we call libertarian in the US, and the former Social Democrat party, which was a socialist party with an economic platform incompatible with and opposed to liberalism in the broad sense.
Supposed "liberals" - in the narrow US sense - espouse the socialism without the liberalism. There's every reason for actual libertarians to be happy with their defeat.
|
