Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
What liberal governing gets you; Chicago and the State losing population in droves
Topic Started: Mar 14 2014, 12:54 AM (658 Views)
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Mar 16 2014, 07:52 PM
Pat
Mar 15 2014, 10:41 PM
colo_crawdad
Mar 15 2014, 09:32 PM
Question. Are those States receiving the most Federal welfare funds in the form of federal money far exceeding what those states pay into the federal government? Or, are those
States paying for the Republican Welfare States? Perhaps Corky can shed some light on my question.
Your first post wants to sway me thread away from the OP. Thanks for the 'disruption game' Colo. I wish you would have the decency to stick to the topic.

He does that a lot doesn't he Pat? It is a game he plays to keep subjects he doesn't like from being discussed.

I believe this is what you call a narrative, Berton. Haven't you complained about that in the past?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
From the OP:
Quote:
 
Every single city and state facing bankruptcy happen to be cities and states with long term liberal politicians at the helm of councils, legislative functions and leaders. Chicago and Illinois, home to our first family are the poster child of this problem.


Now tell me why you consider it an attempt to"disrupt" when an alternative cause of State financial problems is raised. That alternative being the necessity of maintaining welfare funding for the Republican run States? Why is it pat that you don't have the dency to allow such alternative explanations be aired without making personal attacks and thereby encouraging false personal attacks by those like Berton? I expect that kind of post from him, but I do expect more from you, Pat.
Edited by colo_crawdad, Mar 16 2014, 10:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Mar 16 2014, 07:54 PM
The reason the jobs went overseas is because of the high cost of doing business in the USA. Both labor and taxes. Both high labor cost (read unions) and high taxes are liberal mantras.

Many of the jobs that were offshored were not union jobs. It was just done to give corporate investors a better bottom line. The policy has depressed unskilled wages in this country to where people working full time qualify for medicaid and food stamps. Taxes have been dropping for decades. One company offshores and is able to make more money and sell for less. That pressures their competitors to follow suit. Someone should have understood that having cheap consumer goods doesn't help much if you have no job and depressed wages. But, investors and corporations were making a killing with the system so politicians are happy. Who really gives a sh-t about workers and poor people? Certainly not the GOP with their Darwinian economic policies. And, certainly not multinational corporations. I'm not for protectionism, but government should have adopted policies that favor those who manufacture here. It could even been tied to realistic wage and benefit demands.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 16 2014, 09:41 PM
Berton
Mar 16 2014, 07:52 PM
Pat
Mar 15 2014, 10:41 PM
colo_crawdad
Mar 15 2014, 09:32 PM
Question. Are those States receiving the most Federal welfare funds in the form of federal money far exceeding what those states pay into the federal government? Or, are those
States paying for the Republican Welfare States? Perhaps Corky can shed some light on my question.
Your first post wants to sway me thread away from the OP. Thanks for the 'disruption game' Colo. I wish you would have the decency to stick to the topic.

He does that a lot doesn't he Pat? It is a game he plays to keep subjects he doesn't like from being discussed.

I believe this is what you call a narrative, Berton. Haven't you complained about that in the past?

It is what Pat said it was colo_crawdad, your attempt at diversion.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
tomdrobin
Mar 16 2014, 10:39 PM
Berton
Mar 16 2014, 07:54 PM
The reason the jobs went overseas is because of the high cost of doing business in the USA. Both labor and taxes. Both high labor cost (read unions) and high taxes are liberal mantras.

Many of the jobs that were offshored were not union jobs. It was just done to give corporate investors a better bottom line. The policy has depressed unskilled wages in this country to where people working full time qualify for medicaid and food stamps. Taxes have been dropping for decades. One company offshores and is able to make more money and sell for less. That pressures their competitors to follow suit. Someone should have understood that having cheap consumer goods doesn't help much if you have no job and depressed wages. But, investors and corporations were making a killing with the system so politicians are happy. Who really gives a sh-t about workers and poor people? Certainly not the GOP with their Darwinian economic policies. And, certainly not multinational corporations. I'm not for protectionism, but government should have adopted policies that favor those who manufacture here. It could even been tied to realistic wage and benefit demands.

But it was unions who drove the price of all jobs up. You can not get away from that fact.

It was done to keep the business solvent in a world wide economy. Taxes on corporations in the US are the highest in the world.

And then you continue the BIG LIE. You are so gullible. Soros loves you.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Mar 17 2014, 04:10 AM
But it was unions who drove the price of all jobs up. You can not get away from that fact.

It was done to keep the business solvent in a world wide economy. Taxes on corporations in the US are the highest in the world.
Your so full of it. It wasn't the high cost of labor here, it was the lure of cheap labor there that led to offshoring. We have high corporate taxes full of loopholes. Most are pretty adept at avoiding paying any taxes.

Your delusions are typical of a Koch addict conservative wannabee. :teeth:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 16 2014, 10:16 PM
From the OP:
Quote:
 
Every single city and state facing bankruptcy happen to be cities and states with long term liberal politicians at the helm of councils, legislative functions and leaders. Chicago and Illinois, home to our first family are the poster child of this problem.


Now tell me why you consider it an attempt to"disrupt" when an alternative cause of State financial problems is raised. That alternative being the necessity of maintaining welfare funding for the Republican run States? Why is it pat that you don't have the dency to allow such alternative explanations be aired without making personal attacks and thereby encouraging false personal attacks by those like Berton? I expect that kind of post from him, but I do expect more from you, Pat.
I assume you are aware that a state with some financial issues that need worked out is quite a different case than a state on the cusp of bankruptcy. And the same with counties and cities. This is apples and oranges Colo. The focus of the OP is bankruptcy through failed liberal policy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
New Jersey exemplifies what is happening in California, Illinois and Michigan, as well as other regions and states where liberal policies and the refusing to squash them has taken it's toll. And as I have said before, people will relocate rather than be abused.


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/18/Study-NJ-s-Budget-Crisis-Fueled-By-Exodus-Of-Wealthy-Residents-Fleeing-Taxes

STUDY: NJ'S BUDGET CRISIS FUELED BY EXODUS OF WEALTHY RESIDENTS FLEEING TAXES


by FRANCES MARTEL 18 Mar 2014 353 POST A COMMENT

This video player must be at least 300x170 pixels in order to operate.

A white paper from investment advisory corporation RegentAtlantic finds that New Jersey is losing high percentages of its revenue to wealthy residents moving out to states like Pennsylvania and Florida in the hopes of escaping the highest taxes in the nation.

New Jersey reached record levels of debt last year and Moody's lowered its outlook for the state, citing insufficient revenue to maintain the burdensome state infrastructure that boasts an unwieldy number of public pensions and municipal governments. Moody's chided Chris Christie's administration for its "sluggish" recovery from the late-2000s recession and blamed the state's insufficient revenue for the problem. As a result, Democrats in the state are pushing for higher taxes on the wealthy to generate more revenue.

RegentAtlantic finds in their recently-released white paper that much of the reason for the low revenue intake is that the state's tax burden is disproportionately upon the shoulders of the wealthy, a high percentage of which are simply moving out and taking their money with them.

While a steady trickle of wealthy New Jerseyans began to leave the state at the turn of the century, the exit was exacerbated by 2004's state "millionaire's tax," an increase in taxes that creates a situation for the wealthy where they owe New Jersey more taxes than they do the federal government annually. The millionaire's tax puts those who make over $1 million a year in their own heavily taxed bracket. The study finds that, after the passage of the millionaire's tax, "the net outflow during this period reversed 70% of the wealth gained in the prior four years."

New Jersey's property taxes are also the highest in the nation, and the state takes both an inheritance and estate tax from those who inherit more than $675,000 in real estate, securities, or cash, plus a charities tax for those giving non-profits any sizable donation. One attorney told RegentAtlantic that the limit might seem high, but it “means that if you have a small pension and you have a house in Morris County you are very likely over that limit." Another attorney estimated that "about 95%" of his clients from New Jersey had stopped doing business there.

The taxes have taken a toll on the high-income population of the state. New Jersey lost 87,630 tax returns to other states between 2009 and 2010, a $5.5 million taxable revenue drop for the state. 70% of those losses were to Pennsylvania and Florida, states with significantly lower tax burdens on the wealthy; Florida also has no estate tax.

(article continues- see link)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Mar 19 2014, 09:15 PM
colo_crawdad
Mar 16 2014, 10:16 PM
From the OP:
Quote:
 
Every single city and state facing bankruptcy happen to be cities and states with long term liberal politicians at the helm of councils, legislative functions and leaders. Chicago and Illinois, home to our first family are the poster child of this problem.


Now tell me why you consider it an attempt to"disrupt" when an alternative cause of State financial problems is raised. That alternative being the necessity of maintaining welfare funding for the Republican run States? Why is it pat that you don't have the dency to allow such alternative explanations be aired without making personal attacks and thereby encouraging false personal attacks by those like Berton? I expect that kind of post from him, but I do expect more from you, Pat.
I assume you are aware that a state with some financial issues that need worked out is quite a different case than a state on the cusp of bankruptcy. And the same with counties and cities. This is apples and oranges Colo. The focus of the OP is bankruptcy through failed liberal policy.
And, I think that emphasis is just wrong, that an alternative cause for the financial problems does, in fact exist and the alternative makes a good deal more sense that the old "liberal governing fails" mantra of the US Right.

BTW, is the refusal to provide safety for school children because it would not be "cost effective" be an example of "foode" or "failed" conservative management of taxpayers' dollars?
Edited by colo_crawdad, Mar 19 2014, 10:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 19 2014, 10:10 PM
Pat
Mar 19 2014, 09:15 PM
colo_crawdad
Mar 16 2014, 10:16 PM
From the OP:
Quote:
 
Every single city and state facing bankruptcy happen to be cities and states with long term liberal politicians at the helm of councils, legislative functions and leaders. Chicago and Illinois, home to our first family are the poster child of this problem.


Now tell me why you consider it an attempt to"disrupt" when an alternative cause of State financial problems is raised. That alternative being the necessity of maintaining welfare funding for the Republican run States? Why is it pat that you don't have the dency to allow such alternative explanations be aired without making personal attacks and thereby encouraging false personal attacks by those like Berton? I expect that kind of post from him, but I do expect more from you, Pat.
I assume you are aware that a state with some financial issues that need worked out is quite a different case than a state on the cusp of bankruptcy. And the same with counties and cities. This is apples and oranges Colo. The focus of the OP is bankruptcy through failed liberal policy.
And, I think that emphasis is just wrong, that an alternative cause for the financial problems does, in fact exist and the alternative makes a good deal more sense that the old "liberal governing fails" mantra of the US Right.

BTW, is the refusal to provide safety for school children because it would not be "cost effective" be an example of "foode" or "failed" conservative management of taxpayers' dollars?
I'm sure there are several factors at play but they all revolve around a simple truth, the liberal governing has not dealt with the growing problem of underfunding of the promises made. Instead of adding even more social programs and with just saying no to employee unions, the spending and misgoverning has continued. I'm not inventing any of the numbers Colo nor the cause/affect examples shown in the article I posted concerning liberal governed New Jersey. And the solution of bleeding the wealthy dry is not going to fix the mismanagement. The wealthy are not going to foot the problems of this liberal Utopian financial nightmare. They will pack up and move as is happening.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis