MELTDOWN STATUS ACHIEVED ❄

PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
squarepush3r said:
under which president did the biggest increase in national debt occur under? Just curious if you know because you specifically mention right wing policies failing.
Click to expand...
Under which policies did the national debt grow? As I recall, it was Reagan that destroyed the progressive tax code, exploded the deficit, and shifted the tax burden to the middle class and the states in a major way. Those tax policies have only become more regressive.

Or do you mean the rollback on consumer and financial protection policies that enabled to speculation and economic bubbles that lead us into the Recession? Because those were right wing Republican sponsored bills in the 90s and 2000s. The Recession is the ONLY reason the debt grew like it did under Obama, he inherited that problem.

Or do you mean the $10 Trillion war and the trillions funneled into the Department of Defense, several of which were "lost" and remain unaccounted for. A war that destabilized the Middle East and made the entire region our financial obligation as our own economy tanked and our safety nets were catching the entire working class.

For you to simplify and mislead in such a way is shameful. Are you just acting stupid?
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Now you're in a quandary. So Woodrow Wilson is actually responsible for enabling all the policies that add to the deficit.....and he was a Democrat but not a "southern" Democrat. More of a Liberal Progressive.
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
And here we go again.

Trump making tax rates regressive arbitrarily and calling short-sighted business gains a success. Tax revenue plummets.

Trump rolling back Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as Wall Street creates another bubble bigger than ever before. Another Recession coming up.

Trump rolling back safety nets and destroying access to healthcare. Maybe Depression is more accurate.
 
Last edited:
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Now you're in a quandary. So Woodrow Wilson is actually responsible for enabling all the policies that add to the deficit.....and he was a Democrat but not a "southern" Democrat. More of a Liberal Progressive.
Click to expand...

Care to be more specific? Do you know what the top rate on income and capital gains were under Wilson?
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
Care to be more specific? Do you know what the top rate on income and capital gains were under Wilson?
Click to expand...
He signed the Federal Reserve Act and no, I don't.............I am reading some book of his, "the new freedom".

"So, keep the air clear with constant discussion. Make every public servant feel that he is acting in the open and under scrutiny; and, above all things else, take these great fundamental questions of your lives with which political platforms concern themselves and search them through and through by every process of debate. Then we shall have a clear air in which we shall see our way to each kind of social betterment. When we have freed our government, when we have restored freedom of enterprise, when we have broken up the partnerships between money and power which now block us at every turn, then we shall see our way to accomplish all the handsome things which platforms promise in vain if they do not start at the point where stand the gates of liberty."
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
He signed the Federal Reserve Act and no, I don't.............I am reading some book of his, "the new freedom".

"So, keep the air clear with constant discussion. Make every public servant feel that he is acting in the open and under scrutiny; and, above all things else, take these great fundamental questions of your lives with which political platforms concern themselves and search them through and through by every process of debate. Then we shall have a clear air in which we shall see our way to each kind of social betterment. When we have freed our government, when we have restored freedom of enterprise, when we have broken up the partnerships between money and power which now block us at every turn, then we shall see our way to accomplish all the handsome things which platforms promise in vain if they do not start at the point where stand the gates of liberty."
Click to expand...
As far as I know, the Great Depression was exasperated by the Fed in how it acted leading up to the 1929 crash, and by not acting how and when it should have after the crash; it didn't do what it was designed to do during an economic downturn. In contrast, I've read that the Fed did a fairly good job reacting to the Recession, such as QE and keeping interest rates low. But leading up to the Recession the Fed looked the other way on toxic loans and bad financial practices. It also hasn't effectively solved inherent problems that lead to the recession, such as too big to fail financial institutions.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
As far as I know, the Great Depression was exasperated by the Fed in how it acted leading up to the 1929 crash, and by not acting how and when it should have after the crash; it didn't do what it was designed to do during an economic downturn. In contrast, I've read that the Fed did a fairly good job reacting to the Recession, such as QE and keeping interest rates low. But leading up to the Recession the Fed looked the other way on toxic loans and bad financial practices. It also hasn't effectively solved inherent problems that lead to the recession, such as too big to fail financial institutions.
Click to expand...
How did it do in its intended mission statement to protect the value of the dollar?
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
How did it do in its intended mission statement to protect the value of the dollar?
Click to expand...
By what metric? Inflation has been low (most inflation that devalued the dollar was between the mid 1960s and early 1980s). Real incomes rose much faster than the dollar value declined, most econimists say just looking at CPI isn't enough and that consumers are still better off today (dollar worth less, but we have a lot more dollars). Also, the USD's value has been constant with other currencies for decades. So relatively, they have done just OK it seems.

I think what most people are blaming on devaluation of the dollar is really a sympton of unequal economic gains and horrible wealth distribution in the last 40 years, and especially since the Recession. That has more to do with trickle down economics policies and unchecked corporate greed via our big-money controlled Legislative branch, as well as the deteriation of workers rights, automation and outsourcing of jobs, gutting of public infrastructure, jobs, and safety nets, 640,000 medical bankruptcies each year, you know, the symptons of a system rigged by the rich and powerful. Not so much to do with the Fed's monetary policy.
 
Last edited:
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
By what metric? Inflation has been low (most inflation that devalued the dollar was between the mid 1960s and early 1980s). Real incomes rose much faster than the dollar value declined, most econimists say just looking at CPI isn't enough and that consumers are still better off today (dollar worth less, but we have a lot more dollars). Also, the USD's value has been constant with other currencies for decades. So relatively, they have done just OK it seems.

I think what most people are blaming on devaluation of the dollar is really a sympton of unequal economic gains and horrible wealth distribution in the last 40 years, and especially since the Recession. That has more to do with trickle down economics policies and unchecked corporate greed via our big-money controlled Legislative branch, as well as the deteriation of workers rights, automation and outsourcing of jobs, gutting of public infrastructure, jobs, and safety nets, 640,000 medical bankruptcies each year, you know, the symptons of a system rigged by the rich and powerful. Not so much to do with the Fed's monetary policy.
Click to expand...
You're making this way too complicated. Lets look at the metric, standard in this case. Us dollar is defined as one troy oz of silver. So find out how many notes for a dollar it takes to purchase a dollar and there's a good starting point for value.
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
You're making this way too complicated. Lets look at the metric, standard in this case. Us dollar is defined as one troy oz of silver. So find out how many notes for a dollar it takes to purchase a dollar and there's a good starting point for value.
Click to expand...
I addressed that re: CPI. Consumer Price Index is a better indicator than speculative commodities like silver and gold. Still, both will show roughly the same high devaluation of the dollar. But if you consider real incomes, a person today will still be able to buy more gold than a person in 1913.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
I addressed that re: CPI. Consumer Price Index is a better indicator than speculative commodities like silver and gold. Still, both will show roughly the same high devaluation of the dollar. But if you consider real incomes, a person today will still be able to buy more gold than a person in 1913.
Click to expand...
What would you say was the mean personal or household incomes in 1913, the first year of the 1040?

I know 3000 was the min required to file then.
1913, the first year of the 1040; average annual income was $3000. Would you disagree?
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
As far as I know, the Great Depression was exasperated by the Fed in how it acted leading up to the 1929 crash, and by not acting how and when it should have after the crash; it didn't do what it was designed to do during an economic downturn. In contrast, I've read that the Fed did a fairly good job reacting to the Recession, such as QE and keeping interest rates low. But leading up to the Recession the Fed looked the other way on toxic loans and bad financial practices. It also hasn't effectively solved inherent problems that lead to the recession, such as too big to fail financial institutions.
Click to expand...
The EC did not do as it was designed to by keeping a madman out of office, either.

Good argument for why we need to change the rules.
 
see4

see4

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
he also pledged allegiance to al qaeda and hezbollah, and both of those groups are opposed to ISIL.

so his pledges were quite meaningless. he was a lone wolf who acted alone, no affiliation to any groups overseas or domestic.
Click to expand...
ISIL, Al Qaeda and Hezbollah all have some things in common. Care to take a guess at what those might be? And the likely reason(s) he chose to pledge allegiance to said affiliates.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
Please cite with something credible. Don't be a Methy-anne Conway, don't make shit up as you go.
Click to expand...

It's true, he registered in 2006. Poor argument on single strokes part though, considering you only have register once, making the amount of time irrelevant. Now if he could prove he voted along Democratic party lines in that time, that may be different, but I doubt it.
 
Last edited:
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
According to this, annual income per person in 1913 was $400.

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2010/nov/24/virginia-tea-party-patriots/virginia-tea-party-says-dollar-has-lost-98-percent/
Click to expand...

That's not a source. Pfitzner's source is still not identified.

according to this http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/the-income-tax-in-1913-a-way-t/ the minimum to file was $3000.
Using the lowest possible measure of inflation, that's about $54,000 today. Source is the 1040.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top