The Clinton Surplus Myth...

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by onalandline, Aug 22, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can describe it as insignificant based on historical lack of correlation.

    Too bad you you can't describe the relationship between tax rates and income. You could have had some point, but you don't.
     
  2. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We have changed tax policy numerous times over the past 60 years, and contrary to conservatives' strenuous claims, there has been no observable correlation relationship between lower taxes and better economic performance. Based on that, there appears to be no significant relationship or function between taxes and gross income.

    Since you have claimed that there is an effect between taxes and gross income, or R = f(I) = ET * I, can you tell me the function that describes the relationship between ET and I ?
     
  3. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    oh, so the answer is no. Thank you.
     
  4. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    statistical prowess, .............Not ! Thanks for the laugh !
     
  5. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so now you are calling for more taxing and more spending ?
     
  6. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh, so the answer is no. You could have had some point, but you don't.
     
  7. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Psychotic?
     
  8. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Try "I know you are, but what am I " It makes you look more credible.
     
  9. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Devolving to one line ad homs.

    How unusual for you.
     
  10. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your position is based upon an "IF", go back to the chalkboard. Or better yet, go back to college and take some math courses.
     
  11. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    His point was obvious. You cannot describe the relationship between tax rates and tax revenues because you lack the evidence and technical expertise needed to establish such a relationship.
     
  12. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, you are.
     
  13. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did describe it. No significant relationship. Feel free to present your proof my explanation was wrong instead of just flapping your gums.
     
  14. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [​IMG]
     
  15. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, of course "if". If you do not increase the effective tax rate you are not going to collect more revenues for any given level of gross income. Jeez. Or much simplier do I have to make it for you?

    Please identify the math error you claim I've made. Or are you once again reverting to baseless, false ad hom accusations?
     
  16. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So the answer is no. Thank you.
     
  17. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If there is no "significant relationship" between tax rates and tax revenues, then raising tax rates will not necessarily result in higher tax revenues.

    I don't need to disprove your claims. The onus falls on you to substantiate them. You should have learned this in law school.
     
  18. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And how do you plan to increase the effective tax rate paid by taxpayers.
     
  19. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    The thread is over 500 posts. Feel free to start another.

    Shangrila
    Site Moderator
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page