Metal Sludge Gossip Board

After 4 years of failure to even do this basic task and responsibility, the Senate Democrats squeezed through a budget that includes nearly $1 trillion, (that's Trillion with a T to quote Obama) in new taxes. Of course those taxes are largely unspecified as like with Obamacare, they will just pass it now and figure out the actual details later.

Fortunately the GOP house will shoot this down. 4 sane Democrats (with elections coming up in 2014) voted against the bill. Comprehensive tax reform is obviously not in the plans of either special interest fearing party.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/20 ... -hike?lite

Sheep_Mafia wrote:After 4 years of failure to even do this basic task and responsibility, the Senate Democrats squeezed through a budget that includes nearly $1 trillion, (that's Trillion with a T to quote Obama) in new taxes. Of course those taxes are largely unspecified as like with Obamacare, they will just pass it now and figure out the actual details later.

A trillion dollar tax hike over 10 years is not a large tax hike. Total economic output from 2013 to 2023 should be about 180 trillion dollars even with very sluggish nominal GDP growth of 4%/year. 1 trillion over 10 years comes out to about .55% of GDP. Reagan's 82 tax hike was 1.4% of GDP.

The page you link says the budget reduces the deficit by 1.85 trillion via a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes.

The Democrats' plan from Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray aims to reduce deficits by $1.85 trillion over 10 years through an equal mix of tax increases and spending cuts.

A structural deficit is reduced via combination of spending cuts and tax hikes. A cyclical deficit can be reduced via economic growth. However, since the national debt increased 500 billion in 2007 when the economy was at full employment, the structural deficit is at least 500 billion in 2007 dollars.

The actual amount of deficit reduction needs to be close to 5 trillion over ten years, divided equally between tax hikes and spending cuts.

The GOP plan reduces the deficit solely by cutting programs to help the poor. Highly unlikely Romney would have even signed such a extreme budget. The Ryan plan is an even bigger joke than this budget.

So this budget is a step in the right direction but not enough to address the serious long term fiscal problems created by the GOP when they controlled the federal govt from Jan 2001 to Jan 2007.

Lesson learned is that a tax cut that will return a surplus to the tax payer will increase the deficit. Seems self-evident but apparently not when you believe the Earth is 6000 years old and Wall Street crashed because govt forced the big banks to lend money to the poor.

Learn some math asshole.

DEATH ROW JOE wrote:

Sheep_Mafia wrote:After 4 years of failure to even do this basic task and responsibility, the Senate Democrats squeezed through a budget that includes nearly $1 trillion, (that's Trillion with a T to quote Obama) in new taxes. Of course those taxes are largely unspecified as like with Obamacare, they will just pass it now and figure out the actual details later.

A trillion dollar tax hike over 10 years is not a large tax hike. Total economic output from 2013 to 2023 should be about 180 trillion dollars even with very sluggish nominal GDP growth of 4%/year. 1 trillion over 10 years comes out to about .55% of GDP. Reagan's 82 tax hike was 1.4% of GDP.

The page you link says the budget reduces the deficit by 1.85 trillion via a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes.

The Democrats' plan from Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray aims to reduce deficits by $1.85 trillion over 10 years through an equal mix of tax increases and spending cuts.

A structural deficit is reduced via combination of spending cuts and tax hikes. A cyclical deficit can be reduced via economic growth. However, since the national debt increased 500 billion in 2007 when the economy was at full employment, the structural deficit is at least 500 billion in 2007 dollars.

The actual amount of deficit reduction needs to be close to 5 trillion over ten years, divided equally between tax hikes and spending cuts.

The GOP plan reduces the deficit solely by cutting programs to help the poor. Highly unlikely Romney would have even signed such a extreme budget. The Ryan plan is an even bigger joke than this budget.

So this budget is a step in the right direction but not enough to address the serious long term fiscal problems created by the GOP when they controlled the federal govt from Jan 2001 to Jan 2007.

Lesson learned is that a tax cut that will return a surplus to the tax payer will increase the deficit. Seems self-evident but apparently not when you believe the Earth is 6000 years old and Wall Street crashed because govt forced the big banks to lend money to the poor.

Learn some math asshole.

You are one angry little liberal. Have yourself a good cry and man the hell up and deal with reality. Step in the right direction to you means over burden the hell out of the successful in taxes. You need to pick a strategy that you can stick with. Sometimes it's the debt doesn't matter and with interest rates so low we should be borrowing. Now we need to raise taxes even higher to fund liberal nonsense and new programs we can't possibly afford (Obamacare). You are as bad as Obama in flip flopping.

I understand this mathatical equation perfectly: Nearly $17 trillion dollars in debt and rapidly growing + trillions more in unfunded future liabilities + dire need of tax reform and expanding the tax base + inept and cowardly leadership lacking the will or understanding to deal with the issues + irresponsible and ignorant voting base who just can't properly assign accountability to those elected unless its the other party (see your dumbass for example) = disaster.

Sheep_Mafia wrote: Step in the right direction to you means over burden the hell out of the successful in taxes.

Taxes are at a historic low, dumb ass. The wealthy face an extremely low tax burden right now. The average effective tax rate for the top 400 was 19% in 2009. Back in 1996, it was 27.8%.

SOI-Tax Stats-Top 400 Individual Income Tax Returns with the Largest Adjusted Gross Incomes
http://www.irs.gov/file_source/pub/irs- ... top400.pdf

Sheep_Mafia wrote:You need to pick a strategy that you can stick with. Sometimes it's the debt doesn't matter and with interest rates so low we should be borrowing.

My position is consistent dumb ass. The problem is you are too stupid to understand the difference between short term and long term.

Right now it is a mistake to reduce the deficit. However, there is a structural deficit that was created by GOP policy and that needs to be addressed.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:Now we need to raise taxes even higher to fund liberal nonsense and new programs we can't possibly afford (Obamacare). You are as bad as Obama in flip flopping.

I said the country needs 5 trillion in deficit reduction spread over 10 years and it needs to be divided equally between spending cuts and revenue.

Learn to read asshole. I did not say to increase spending on new programs.

Once again, spelled out for you very clearly.

Currently it is a mistake to cut spending to reduce the deficit. Cuts in public investment and consumption have slowed growth for 10 of the last 12 quarters.

However, the GOP created a 500 billion dollar structural deficit. This needs to be corrected and historically structural deficits are always corrected by a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts.

Terms/concepts you need to familiarize yourself with:
1) long term vs short term
2) structural/cyclical deficits

Sheep_Mafia wrote:I understand this mathatical equation perfectly:

You can't even spell mathematical let alone understand the math.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:Nearly $17 trillion dollars in debt and rapidly growing

The debt is growing at a slower pace, dumb ass. It is not growing more rapidly. Growth rate was cut in half under Obama.

Bush's last year, national debt grew 15.6%
12/31/2007 9,229,172,659,218.31
2/31/2008 10,699,804,864,612.13

Last year, national debt grew 7.9%
12/30/2011 15,222,940,045,451.09
12/31/2012 16,432,730,050,569.12

Sheep_Mafia wrote:+ trillions more in unfunded future liabilities

Hundreds of trillions more in economic output to fund those liabilities, dumb ass.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:+ dire need of tax reform and expanding the tax base

There is not a "dire" need for tax reform.

"Expand the tax base" means cut taxes on the Koch bros and raise your taxes. Just so you understand what you are duped into supporting.

Simply go back to the Reagan rates in 84 when the top rate was 50% and capital gains were taxed at 28%. That will resolve every revenue problem. They called it "morning in America."

Sheep_Mafia wrote:+ inept and cowardly leadership lacking the will or understanding to deal with the issues

It's clear you do not understand the issues so you are in no position to determine whether anyone else understands the issues.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:+ irresponsible and ignorant voting base who just can't properly assign accountability to those elected unless its the other party (see your dumbass for example) = disaster.

You need to learn how to read.

I criticized both sides for reducing the deficit now. I said it was a mistake for Obama to reduce the deficit more than any president in history at a time when cuts in public investment and consumption were a drag on GDP growth.

So I have blamed Obama for reducing the deficit and slowing GDP growth.

You only hear what you want to hear. That's why you are stuck on stupid.

DEATH ROW BLOW JOB wrote:

Sheep_Mafia wrote:Nearly $17 trillion dollars in debt and rapidly growing

The debt is growing at a slower pace, dumb ass. It is not growing more rapidly. Growth rate was cut in half under Obama.

Bush's last year, national debt grew 15.6%
12/31/2007 9,229,172,659,218.31
2/31/2008 10,699,804,864,612.13

Last year, national debt grew 7.9%
12/30/2011 15,222,940,045,451.09
12/31/2012 16,432,730,050,569.12

Your posts are almost ALWAYS entirely full of shit, but the above takes the cake...and is the funniest thus far...

So DRJ to summarize you think it's proper that some pay half their earnings in federal taxes (so you can continue to contribute little to nothing), reducing the deficit is wrong and we're just going to grow our way out of this. You think that even though the debt is out of control and still growing at a greatly unsustainable pace that its all good since its not growing as much as it did a year ago.

You are saying that you are not in agreement with spending on new programs but support Obamacare and expansion of the welfare state. Fuzzy math to be sure. I don't find you credible enough to speak on any of this based on your flip flopping and general ignorance.

All that utter nonsense while anyone with half a brain around here gets you would have a completely different view of those same issues if McCain and/or Romney had won the elections. Hell, half of what you say are great Obama moves you ride Bush for. You celebrate Obama's incompetence but don't credit Bush for his same negligence. You are not only a ignorant party hack cheerleader but a painfully transparent one as well.

Edited because Danzig in the Dark is a boring and pointless fucker with nothing more to contribute outside of hair metal messageboard spell check gems.

I wish it would summerize. I'm sick of snow and ice.

Moggio wrote:
Your posts are almost ALWAYS entirely full of shit, but the above takes the cake...and is the funniest thus far...

A post cannot "take" a "cake". That's as outrageous as "wheels falling off" Ron Paul's campaign.
Such idioms do not exist in this universe, moron.

Danzig in the Dark wrote:I wish it would summerize. I'm sick of snow and ice.

Easily the best post of yours that I've seen here. Congrats on that.

Moggio wrote: Your posts are almost ALWAYS entirely full of shit, but the above takes the cake...and is the funniest thus far...

That is simply a factual statement Moggio. The national debt grew at a slower pace in 2012 than 2008.

Moggio, you're financially illiterate and do not understand shit about sovereign debt. Sovereign debt is only measured relative to GDP so sovereign debt is reduced when nominal GDP grows faster than sovereign debt.

Nominal GDP grew 7.3%/year from 1950 to 2000. So a rate of growth of 7.9% is very close to debt stabilization, which means the national debt is reduced as a percentage of GDP.

Go ahead and again tell us that there is a speculative treasury bubble and any day now the treasury market will collapse, triggering a global financial crisis worse than the great depression.

Here are your exact words from Nov 6, 2012:

Once the Currency/Treasury Bubble bursts in 1-2 years or sooner, you're going to see unemployment rates sky-rocket to nearly Great Depression era level heights

You heard some financially illiterate moron make that idiotic prediction and since you are clueless, you mindlessly repeated it.

There is no speculative treasury bubble, you fucking idiot.

You told everyone to buy gold on Nov 6, 2012.

Gold closed at 1,723.30/oz on Nov 6th, 2012.

Today it is 1604. Great advice asshole.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:So DRJ to summarize you think it's proper that some pay half their earnings in federal taxes (so you can continue to contribute little to nothing)

I pay more federal income tax in a month than you pay in a year, easily. Make no mistake about that bitch.

DEATH ROW JOE wrote:

Sheep_Mafia wrote:So DRJ to summarize you think it's proper that some pay half their earnings in federal taxes (so you can continue to contribute little to nothing)

I pay more federal income tax in a month than you pay in a year, easily. Make no mistake about that bitch.

You ever notice how many of these Sludge Republicans are always so much more rich and successful than everyone else, especially those who disagree with them? It's like these clowns have never heard of Tattooed Lyin or Licketysplit.

Danzig in the Dark wrote:

DEATH ROW JOE wrote:

Sheep_Mafia wrote:So DRJ to summarize you think it's proper that some pay half their earnings in federal taxes (so you can continue to contribute little to nothing)

I pay more federal income tax in a month than you pay in a year, easily. Make no mistake about that bitch.

You ever notice how many of these Sludge Republicans are always so much more rich and successful than everyone else, especially those who disagree with them? It's like these clowns have never heard of Tattooed Lyin or Licketysplit.

You're saying that to someone who just bragged on the internet about how much money he makes. A bit of irony there.

Like most of DRJ's positions it's both pointless and irrelevant to the discussion and again like most of his figures completely made up.

I can't imagine any of you liberals are very successful with the nonsense and downtrodden attitudes on display here.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:

Danzig in the Dark wrote: You ever notice how many of these Sludge Republicans are always so much more rich and successful than everyone else, especially those who disagree with them? It's like these clowns have never heard of Tattooed Lyin or Licketysplit.

You're saying that to someone who just bragged on the internet about how much money he makes. A bit of irony there.

Yet you see fit to comment on him. Doubly ironic.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:Like most of DRJ's positions it's both pointless and irrelevant to the discussion and again like most of his figures completely made up.

Really? If he's full of shit, where's the truth? It can't be that difficult for such successful people to find the truth.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:I can't imagine any of you liberals are very successful with the nonsense and downtrodden attitudes on display here.

Of course not.

It's impossible to take you seriously when you go with the "I'm more successful than you" bit. No one reads your posts and thinks, "He said he was successful and those he disagrees with are not so he must be right." It just reminds everyone of fools like Licketysplit who inflated their Sludge resumes and were eventually outed.

I don't know why you have such a hard time finding the truth either here or in the real world. Unemployment is what it is, the national debt is what it is, Obama's lack of leadership is glaring and the social decay continues in the country. Even by liberal standards its a fail since there is such concern about the wealth divide. The scoreboard looks pretty sad and as Joe Biden says, the middle class continues to get hammered. The truth is not however that the people in charge for the last 4 years have no role in that. The truth is not that debt at the level the US has is good or that successful people should pay 60-70% of their income in taxes. I see the truth as do others here. It's on you if you don't.

I have never once flaunted success around here so drop that stupidity. It's the internet and anyone can say anything much like DRJ going all "pay more taxes in a month" in his latest departure from reality. I have no ideal if DRJ or anyone else here is successful. Yes I question it at times because it doesn't add up that people who have achieved anything would feel so oppressed by the alledged "man". Folk like DRJ seem ate up with envy at what others have. None of those are profiles of success.

I hope he is successful just like I hope you are and every single person here. I support success and a country that fosters it. That's another one of those obvious truths that you are having trouble seeing.

As to whether the likes of you take me serious on this here hair metal messageboard...well, the truth is--I just don't care.

Sheep_Mafia wrote:I don't know why you have such a hard time finding the truth either here or in the real world. Unemployment is what it is, the national debt is what it is, Obama's lack of leadership is glaring and the social decay continues in the country. Even by liberal standards its a fail since there is such concern about the wealth divide. The scoreboard looks pretty sad and as Joe Biden says, the middle class continues to get hammered. The truth is not however that the people in charge for the last 4 years have no role in that. The truth is not that debt at the level the US has is good or that successful people should pay 60-70% of their income in taxes. I see the truth as do others here. It's on you if you don't.

I have never once flaunted success around here so drop that stupidity. It's the internet and anyone can say anything much like DRJ going all "pay more taxes in a month" in his latest departure from reality. I have no ideal if DRJ or anyone else here is successful. Yes I question it at times because it doesn't add up that people who have achieved anything would feel so oppressed by the alledged "man". Folk like DRJ seem ate up with envy at what others have. None of those are profiles of success.

I hope he is successful just like I hope you are and every single person here. I support success and a country that fosters it. That's another one of those obvious truths that you are having trouble seeing.

As to whether the likes of you take me serious on this here hair metal messageboard...well, the truth is--I just don't care.

Just a verbose Moggio.

Graph
Chart
Chart
Graph
Graph
Blah
Chart
Graph

Joe I agree with nearly EVERYTHING you say but stop. You'll persuade many more people using your own words.

Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:

Moggio wrote:Your posts are almost ALWAYS entirely full of shit, but the above takes the cake...and is the funniest thus far...

A post cannot "take" a "cake". That's as outrageous as "wheels falling off" Ron Paul's campaign.
Such idioms do not exist in this universe, moron.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/take+the+cake

Take the cake IS an idiom, moron.

DEATH ROW BLOW JOB wrote:

Moggio wrote: Your posts are almost ALWAYS entirely full of shit, but the above takes the cake...and is the funniest thus far...

That is simply a factual statement Moggio. The national debt grew at a slower pace in 2012 than 2008.

Moggio, you're financially illiterate and do not understand shit about sovereign debt. Sovereign debt is only measured relative to GDP so sovereign debt is reduced when nominal GDP grows faster than sovereign debt.

Nominal GDP grew 7.3%/year from 1950 to 2000. So a rate of growth of 7.9% is very close to debt stabilization, which means the national debt is reduced as a percentage of GDP.

Go ahead and again tell us that there is a speculative treasury bubble and any day now the treasury market will collapse, triggering a global financial crisis worse than the great depression.

Here are your exact words from Nov 6, 2012:

Once the Currency/Treasury Bubble bursts in 1-2 years or sooner, you're going to see unemployment rates sky-rocket to nearly Great Depression era level heights

You heard some financially illiterate moron make that idiotic prediction and since you are clueless, you mindlessly repeated it.

There is no speculative treasury bubble, you fucking idiot.

You told everyone to buy gold on Nov 6, 2012.

Gold closed at 1,723.30/oz on Nov 6th, 2012.

Today it is 1604. Great advice asshole.

ONE. MORE. TIME. FOR. THE. WORLD.:


What part of Obama has added to the US debt more than ANY other US President in history, don't you understand? The US debt was just over $10 TRILLION when Bush Jnr. exited. It is now $16.5 TRILLION and counting.

The price of Gold has SKY-ROCKETED in the past 10 years, especially in the last 4 years. Just because it's SLIGHTLY dipped over the past several months, doesn't mean shit. There are always peak and valleys with the value of products, minerals, etc., even with the most successful.

Lastly, how in the world could there NOT be an imminently-bursting Currency/Treasuries Bubble, considering the US is borrowing over $3 BILLION per day from creditors (some of which are already in recession like Japan) and since the Fed is printing $40 BILLION+ per month?!


You are fucking stupid BEYOND BELIEF...

Moggio wrote: Take the cake IS an idiom, moron.

And "sarcasm" is the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

That one sure flew right over your head, buttwipe.

Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:

Moggio wrote: Take the cake IS an idiom, moron.

And "sarcasm" is the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

That one sure flew right over your head, buttwipe.

Riiiiiiiiiight. Like you knew that was an idiom.

Now who's dancing, genius?!

Moggio wrote:

Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:

Moggio wrote: Take the cake IS an idiom, moron.

And "sarcasm" is the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

That one sure flew right over your head, buttwipe.

Riiiiiiiiiight. Like you knew that was an idiom.

Now who's dancing, genius?!

He was mocking your unfamiliarity with the 'wheels falling off' metaphor. Keep dancing.

Danzig in the Dark wrote:

Moggio wrote:Riiiiiiiiiight. Like you knew that was an idiom.

Now who's dancing, genius?!

He was mocking your unfamiliarity with the 'wheels falling off' metaphor. Keep dancing.

Riiiiiiiiight.

And I'm the Easter Bunny...


Keep tryin' and you'll keep failin'...

Moggio wrote:

Danzig in the Dark wrote:

Moggio wrote:Riiiiiiiiiight. Like you knew that was an idiom.

Now who's dancing, genius?!

He was mocking your unfamiliarity with the 'wheels falling off' metaphor. Keep dancing.

Riiiiiiiiight.

And I'm the Easter Bunny...

As you wish, chump:



And yes, I certainly WAS mocking you....but you couldn't grasp that.

Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:And yes, I certainly WAS mocking you....but you couldn't grasp that.

Riiiiiiiiight.

And I'm the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man victimizing Manhattan...

Grendel wrote:

Baghdad Moggio wrote:

This should be in the Ron Paul sells out thread.

Danzig in the Dark wrote:

Moggio wrote:

This should be in the Ron Paul sells out thread.

There isn't one (or at least one that is accurate).