About iwog

iwog


Follow
Befriend (46)
386 threads
20,363 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Followed by 28
Following 0
Ignored by 10
Ignoring 3
Ignore iwog
Aliases
In United States
Registered Nov 10, 2007

Meow

iwog's most recent comments:

  • On 22 Oct 2014 in Middle Class Wealth Gone!, iwog said:

    humanity says

    iwog says

    All things being equal, without that borrowing wealth disparity would be much much worse.

    But all things wouldn't be equal. Without the borrowing the republicans wouldn't be able to get away with such low taxes. Taxes would have had to have been raised. Politically it would have killed them to finance tax cuts strictly with decreased entitlement spending.

    And then taxes would go up.

    I tried hard but I don't understand your point.

    The assertion was that debt and deficit spending cause wealth disparity, not debt and deficit spending gave Republicans cover to cut their taxes resulting in high wealth disparity. Surely if that is the argument, it was the lower high end taxes which caused the problem and not the debt.

    humanity says

    THe analogy is far from perfect, but Iwog is totally wrong on this one. He can split hairs and stick to his guns if he wants to, but he's wrong.

    How can I be wrong when WWII spending proves you're wrong? Did you look at my chart?

  • On 22 Oct 2014 in Middle Class Wealth Gone!, iwog said:

    Look at my example of the 1940s.

    The country accumulated a massive national debt. Unprecedented in fact. The money from this borrowing was paid in war wages which had a huge affect on wealth disparity after the war.

    How can anyone say debt causes wealth disparity when it did exactly the opposite in the 1940s?

  • On 22 Oct 2014 in Middle Class Wealth Gone!, iwog said:

    Bellingham Bill says

    Pretty simple case to make here; deficit spending is essentially substituting borrowing for taxation.

    Instead of exacting taxes from someone, .gov is selling them a bond.

    The former reduces personal wealth, the latter accrues interest for the holder (or did in the past at least).

    1. All things being equal, without that borrowing wealth disparity would be much much worse. Increasing debt mitigated the effects of regressive taxation. Perhaps temporarily, but every bit of it appears on that chart.
    2. Interest for the holder is nothing more than a bookkeeping entry at this point. It's accurate to say that no one has paid any interest yet and it's certainly possible no one ever will.

See other users near iwog

Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 1320 milliseconds to create.