Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-02-2019, 03:42 PM   #31
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
If Krugman's assertion is that overall wages in the private economy have not gone up, then what is the point of raising public sector wages which depend on income derived from taxing the private sector? And if government workers already have better job security, better guaranteed pension and health insurance than the average private sector worker, as well as, on average, higher pay, then what is the problem with cutting some of that fat from government spending?

And if the reason for corporate tax cuts is to create more jobs, then those cuts are a boon to the "little (unemployed or underemployed) guy." Unemployment numbers are significantly down. That aspect of the tax cuts is working.

And, what TDF said, Obama did it too, so it must be good because Obama is a way better POTUS than Trump.

And, yeah, the government is broke, has been broke . . . and the Krugman/Keynesian deficit spending model will ensure that it will remain broke for a long time . . . or forever.
WDMSO, detbuch asks a tremendous question. If wages are not going up in the private sector, then even if tax rates were unchanged, that means tax revenue collected stays the same, so by what logic should public sector workers than get raises?

You have fun answering that one.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 03:50 PM   #32
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Not true...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Yeah, I just make this chit up as i go along

https://www.generalschedule.org/raise

https://www.generalschedule.org/localities

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:01 PM   #33
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
Obama froze pay in the recession but tried to lift it coming out which was blocked by House Republicans. I don’t think you’re making things up just not well informed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:14 PM   #34
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Obama froze pay in the recession but tried to lift it coming out which was blocked by House Republicans. I don’t think you’re making things up just not well informed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/u.../30freeze.html

"President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers"

and the 3rd year he offered a robust 0.5% (ooooohhhh), pay raise (after initially freezing it) and, you are correct, that was blocked by the house.

first 2 years, all on Obama.

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:17 PM   #35
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/u.../30freeze.html

"President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers"

and the 3rd year he offered a robust 0.5% (ooooohhhh) pay raise (after initially freezing it) and, you are correct, that was blocked by the house.

first 2 years, all on Obama.
Coming out of a massive recession. Duh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:19 PM   #36
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
Were you this concerned in 2011, 2012, and 2013 when Obama cancelled the government pay raises? just trying to establish some consistency in logic

also of note is that Obama didn't increase the Locality adjustment in 2010,2011,2012,2013,2014,and 2015, which also affects retirement.
another one who is cursed by the inability see things in context


It would be the first pay freeze for civilian federal workers since 2011 to 2013, when President Barack Obama instituted a three-year pay freeze as the nation recovered from the recession.
wdmso is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:19 PM   #37
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Coming out of a massive recession. Duh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
soooooooo, that would make it "True" then?

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:21 PM   #38
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
WDMSO, detbuch asks a tremendous question. If wages are not going up in the private sector, then even if tax rates were unchanged, that means tax revenue collected stays the same, so by what logic should public sector workers than get raises?

You have fun answering that one.
because they dont work for private companies... Wow that was hard
wdmso is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:25 PM   #39
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Coming out of a massive recession. Duh.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
but liberals always say the best way to grow the economy, is to increase pay for workers. so why did the democrats, who controlled everything for the first two obama years, choose not to help the economy by raising wages for federal workers.

and first you told TDF thatbit
never happened, then when he proved it, you claimed it was correct economic policy to freeze. you’re all over the place here.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:26 PM   #40
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
because they dont work for private companies... Wow that was hard
you didn’t understand the question.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:29 PM   #41
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
but liberals always say the best way to grow the economy, is to increase pay for workers. so why did the democrats, who controlled everything for the first two obama years, choose not to help the economy by raising wages for federal workers.

and first you told TDF thatbit
never happened, then when he proved it, you claimed it was correct economic policy to freeze. you’re all over the place here.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
No he said Obama’s did it those years which isn’t true. Situations are quite different but I know you don’t really get the details.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:30 PM   #42
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
2 million civilian workers. The Federal Government is the nation's single largest employer. this includes the military

The public sector employs 20.2 million people in the US, approximately 14.5 percent of the workforce.

Seeing the private sector and republicans have screwed 85.5 % of the american worker now they are after the other 14.5 because they have to much to funny
wdmso is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:35 PM   #43
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
No he said Obama’s did it those years which isn’t true. Situations are quite different but I know you don’t really get the details.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
for the second time, why didn’t the democrats put their
money where their mouth is, and give federal workers a raise, which if linerals are correct, would have helped the economy recover from the recession?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:36 PM   #44
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
2 million civilian workers. The Federal Government is the nation's single largest employer. this includes the military

The public sector employs 20.2 million people in the US, approximately 14.5 percent of the workforce.

Seeing the private sector and republicans have screwed 85.5 % of the american worker now they are after the other 14.5 because they have to much to funny
oh, everybody in the private sector is screwed? but of course. i’d
much rather be a public worker, especially here in CT, where public pensions ( after decades of pure liberalism) are funded at approximately 0%. the liberals are really looking out for the public workers!!!

nobody gets screwed worse than state workers. the union lies to them to get their dues, democrat
politicians lie to them to get their votes. i wouldn’t trust my financial
security to these people
for a day.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:39 PM   #45
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
you didn’t understand the question.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
no clearly you dont understand that somehow Trumps tax cut is a good thing but raises are a bad thing but you insist only one impacts the US budget aka raises

if the economy is booming as you constantly remind us how is a 2.5% raise hurting the budget????


“House and Senate Republicans have made a joint offer that includes the 1.9 percent pay raise

but Trump is against it? why is that ?? anger payback or he cares about the budget?
wdmso is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 04:43 PM   #46
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
oh, everybody in the private sector is screwed? but of course. i’d
much rather be a public worker, especially here in CT, where public pensions ( after decades of pure liberalism) are funded at approximately 0%. the liberals are really looking out for the public workers!!!

nobody gets screwed worse than state workers. the union lies to them to get their dues, democrat
politicians lie to them to get their votes. i wouldn’t trust my financial
security to these people
for a day.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
just a general statement but republicans have been after union workers for decades and they only account for 10% of the us work force ... dont understand so much attention against so few
wdmso is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 05:02 PM   #47
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
if the economy is booming as you constantly remind us how is a 2.5% raise hurting the budget????
So you're admitting that the economy is booming?
detbuch is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 05:10 PM   #48
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
just a general statement but republicans have been after union workers for decades and they only account for 10% of the us work force ... dont understand so much attention against so few
republicansnate after corruption and waste, and ground zero for that, is unions and democrats. look at what unions and democrats did to CT, and try to make me wrong. you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by Jim in CT; 01-02-2019 at 06:10 PM..
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 05:44 PM   #49
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Wow that was hard
Government workers are employees of the people of this country. They serve the people, not the other way around. The average private sector citizen makes much less in total wage and benefits than the average public employee. Perhaps you see merit in a system wherein the servant makes more than the master . . . and which accuses the master of being a greedy, fascist pig.

Most private companies are not huge corporations. If you are suggesting that all small to medium size businesses should provide their employees the same wage and benefit packages as well as the job security that average government workers are given, can you please explain how they can afford to do so?

They can't endlessly borrow from their employees in order to pay them. But the federal government not only does that, it borrows from the people that employ it. And the financial debt it owes to the people of this country should more than bankrupt it. It should go to prison for the massive fraud, the embezzlement, it has perpetrated on the people who employ it. But the Ponzi scheme it foists on us is secure because rather than serving us, it rules us.

Yeah, it's not hard for you to say "because they dont work for private companies..." But they do work for a big crook who pays them with an endless supply of stolen money.
detbuch is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 05:53 PM   #50
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
for the second time, why didn’t the democrats put their
money where their mouth is, and give federal workers a raise, which if linerals are correct, would have helped the economy recover from the recession?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I’m giggling again Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 06:15 PM   #51
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I’m giggling again Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
we’re all
laughing, glad you are too.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 06:18 PM   #52
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 17,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Government workers are employees of the people of this country. They serve the people, not the other way around. The average private sector citizen makes much less in total wage and benefits than the average public employee. Perhaps you see merit in a system wherein the servant makes more than the master . . . and which accuses the master of being a greedy, fascist pig.

Most private companies are not huge corporations. If you are suggesting that all small to medium size businesses should provide their employees the same wage and benefit packages as well as the job security that average government workers are given, can you please explain how they can afford to do so?

They can't endlessly borrow from their employees in order to pay them. But the federal government not only does that, it borrows from the people that employ it. And the financial debt it owes to the people of this country should more than bankrupt it. It should go to prison for the massive fraud, the embezzlement, it has perpetrated on the people who employ it. But the Ponzi scheme it foists on us is secure because rather than serving us, it rules us.

Yeah, it's not hard for you to say "because they dont work for private companies..." But they do work for a big crook who pays them with an endless supply of stolen money.
Good summary
And accurate as well



I usually giggle when Spence denies he is a liberal and says he is a centrist.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.

1984 was a warning, not a guidebook!

It's time more people spoke up with the truth. Every time we let a leftist lie go uncorrected, the commies get stronger.
Slipknot is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 07:08 PM   #53
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
As has been claimed here by several for more than a year
“Skeptical reporting has still been too favorable.
The 2017 tax cut has received pretty bad press, and rightly so. Its proponents made big promises about soaring investment and wages, and also assured everyone that it would pay for itself; none of that has happened.

Yet coverage actually hasn’t been negative enough. The story you mostly read runs something like this: The tax cut has caused corporations to bring some money home, but they’ve used it for stock buybacks rather than to raise wages, and the boost to growth has been modest. That doesn’t sound great, but it’s still better than the reality: No money has, in fact, been brought home, and the tax cut has probably reduced national income. Indeed, at least 90 percent of Americans will end up poorer thanks to that cut.
Let me explain each point in turn.“
But you’ll have to open the link and read the concise point by point explanation.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sour...46490561312958
As Jim noted, Krugman doesn't discuss things that run counter to what he is trying to say here. Instead, he focusses on international corporate investment and its influence on federal government revenues, and he reverts to his usual sweeping, generalized theories within theories which forces him to inject weasel words such as "probably" and "don't necessarily correspond to anything real" which give a shadowy image of plausibility to his assertions.

Within his narrow, limited focus he somehow manages to refer to a "national" income, which is presumably the rest of us, and that 90% of Americans will end up poorer because of the tax cuts. I didn't find in his point by point analysis how the tax cuts made me poorer. So far, I am getting more money, not less.

Now, if he is referring to inflation, which I didn't find a reference to in his article, he may have a point. But inflation generally reflects markets improving too rapidly (which may be why he didn't mention it), which can be induced by lowering taxes. So, yes, lower taxes can lead to market expansion, which means the tax cuts are working, maybe too well. But the Fed tries to control that by raising interest rates to slow down market transactions, which creates a market slowdown and gives the false appearance that tax cut policy is not working.

Another inflationary cause is the previous administration's massive money pumping that wasn't used as intended because it basically couldn't find a demand for it in a stagnant market, but is now flooding an expanding market with more money than needed, thus lowering that money's purchasing value. So there is an added layer of inflation that is not a result of the tax cuts.

So he manufactures a global centric argument about money not returning to America because of the tax cuts, but actually flowing to foreign investors who profit because of lower taxes, which, supposedly, in effect, somehow means that the tax cuts are not only not working but they are making 90% of us poorer. But, as I said, he doesn't specifically say how that is so regarding us as individual tax payers. But he implies that is so because the tax cuts also benefit foreign investors. Nor does he mention how the foreign investors contribute to the market in the first place.

But his whole thesis rests solely on his narrow focus on what he claims is money not returning to America, but merely benefitting large corporations, one third of which are owned directly or through investment by foreigners. He disregards the multi-faceted purpose of the tax cuts, the least of which is not to "bring back money" to the U.S., but to bring back and/or create more jobs, including those produced by foreign entrepreneurs moving here. As well, the freeing up of money already here to create more jobs. And, as I can personally attest, to keep some of the people's money in their pocket rather than in the government's. But all of that, to his chagrin, means government wealth shrinks and so will some programs that some "people value" (He didn't say "some", I made the clarification to be more precise.)

He, in the final analysis, worries more about the loss of government income than in individuals gains in money and jobs. But in the end, our federal government never loses money. It refuses to. Even if it has to bleed us to get it.

Last edited by detbuch; 01-02-2019 at 07:16 PM..
detbuch is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 07:36 PM   #54
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
No he said Obama’s did it those years which isn’t true. Situations are quite different but I know you don’t really get the details.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
He didn't????

Let's try this again, don't forget to read slow and enunciate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/u.../30freeze.html

"President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers"

and the 3rd year he offered a robust 0.5% (ooooohhhh), pay raise (after initially freezing it) and, you are correct, that was blocked by the house.

first 2 years, all on Obama.
Don't forget the link, if you click on it magical things will happen
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 01-02-2019 at 08:12 PM..

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 07:38 PM   #55
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
another one who is cursed by the inability see things in context


It would be the first pay freeze for civilian federal workers since 2011 to 2013, when President Barack Obama instituted a three-year pay freeze as the nation recovered from the recession.
You and spence need to get your stories straight, he says it never happened.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 08:06 PM   #56
Sea Dangles
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Sea Dangles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
You and spence need to get your stories straight, he says it never happened.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
You are arguing with an idiot,and guess what happens next...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

PRO CHOICE REPUBLICAN
Sea Dangles is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 08:12 PM   #57
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles View Post
You are arguing with an idiot,and guess what happens next...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I know, down the rabbit hole I go
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 09:44 PM   #58
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
republicansnate after corruption and waste, and ground zero for that, is unions and democrats. look at what unions and democrats did to CT, and try to make me wrong. you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Who controls both branches of government in the 20 states with the lowest household income?
Try and make that a shining star for Republicans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 10:17 PM   #59
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Who controls both branches of government in the 20 states with the lowest household income?
Try and make that a shining star for Republicans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
See, I don't think state government drives the average income of its citizenry, I think citizens determine that for themselves.

How about state debt, which clearly is a function of who is running the state? the highest debt is IL and CT.

CT also has very high incomes. That has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism, an everything to do with our proximity to Manhattan.

Man.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 11:37 PM   #60
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
See, I don't think state government drives the average income of its citizenry, I think citizens determine that for themselves.

How about state debt, which clearly is a function of who is running the state? the highest debt is IL and CT.

CT also has very high incomes. That has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism, an everything to do with our proximity to Manhattan.

Man.
So high taxes are Driven by state governments but state governments have no effect on income levels but the states adjoining them do have some effect

Education, availability of services and Transportation don’t make a difference in how well a state performs for its citizens
That attitude is what keeps the bottom 20 where they are
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com