AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Re taxes, spending, and providing an interesting observation in the level of competence of the people to understand the implications of both, here is a gleaning from my morning's e-mail. It has been around before and is attributed to a real classroom exercise somewhere. I don't know if it actually happened, but, considering how the discussion on taxes, etc. has been going, the universal truth re taxing and spending should be evident here:

*From a teacher in the Nashville area.*

*Who worries about "the cow" when it is all about the "Ice Cream?*

*The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while
teaching third grade this year.*

*The presidential election was heating up and some of
the children showed an interest.*

*I decided we would have an election for a class president.*

*We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech
and the class would vote.*

*To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other
class members. *

*We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students
should have. *

*We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were
picked to run for the top spot.*

*The class had done a great job in their selections.*

*Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an
advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never
seen Olivia's mother.*

*The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie
went first.*

*He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better
place. He ended by promising to do his very best. *

Everyone applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium.
Her speech was concise. *

*She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream."
She sat down.*

*The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She
surely could say more. She did not have to.*

*A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice
cream? She wasn't sure. *

*Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She
didn't know.*

*The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was
ice cream.*

* Jamie was forgotten.*

*Olivia won by a landslide.*

* The government is offering the people a lot of g0odies with the
proposed stimulus package and some are reacting like nine year
olds. they want ice cream. When it comes to ice cream, denial is
a useful tool to have*

*The rest know they will have to have to come up with money to
feed the cow, buy the churn, pay for the rest of the ingredients and
the labor to turn the churn and clean up the mess.*

Good article, genoves. If people would put their thinking cap on, the Laffer curve does not alway say tax revenues will increase with lower rates, and this is where some conservatives go wrong. Higher rates do however dampen productivity pretty much always, all other factors being the same, I think that is safe to say. And it is equally wrong to say that decreased rates never produce increased revenue and do not dampen productivity. It is clear that they do dampen productivity, and if the rates are high enough to be near the peak of the Laffer curve, then revenues could very well increase under a decreased rate.

Regardless of what we do with individual tax rates, I see no reason why we shouldn't greatly reduce corporate tax rates, even eliminate them altogether, after all, people pay the taxes in increased goods or services prices anyway.

Great story, Foxfyre. Neither does Obama know how he is going to pay for the ice cream.

People like Foxie has to turn to "unrelated" analogy to make her point. Why not just challenge them directly, Foxie? You can't? Well, that's a given.

I estimate that when the top tax rate is between 25% and 30%, Federal revenue is generally greater than when the top tax rate is less than 25% or more than 30%.

Why don't MALs (i.e., Modern American Liberals) challenge MACs (i.e., Modern American Conservatives) directly with logical arguments instead of vacuuous demagogery? Apparently they cannot because they can't make any logical arguments that support their bigoted positions.

Cycloptichorn, cicerone imposter, and parados are examples of MALs.

MALs themselves have not dared define MAL and what it stands for. Why? Because they know MAL is an ongoing corruption of reason by envy, and they seek to hide that.

c.i.

I notice that Ican keeps asking you to define MAL.

Did you actually invent that term??? If you did, he is correct...you should define it.

If not, do you know who did?

Nope. However, that's not surprising; they always ask stupid questions.

Do you know who did make it up, c.i.?

It always a hoot to hear you [and the others] talk about denial, Foxy.

I think it was ican.

Jesus H. Christ, c. i. .... you mean to tell me that Ican is asking you to define a term he invented?????

Wow!

Of course, you may be wrong about who made it up...and going back through all this **** really doesn't make much sense.

Wonder how we could find out for sure????

ican, You don't ever get things right! Can't you see that tax revenue is based on GDP? Where does it show that higher tax rates have diminished their economy?

# Country Tax in % of GDP (2007)

1 Denmark 48,9
2 Sweden 48,2
3 Belgium 44,4
4 France 43,6
5 Norway 43,4
6 Italy 43,3
7 Finland 43,0
8 Austria 41,9
9 Iceland 41,4
10 Hungary 39,3
11 Netherlands 38,0
12 Spain 37,2
13 Luxembourg 36,9
13 United Kingdom 36,6
14 Portugal 36,6
15 Czech Republic 36,4
16 Germany 36,2
17 New Zealand 36,0
18 Poland 33,5 18 Canada 33,3
19 Ireland 32,2 19 Greece 31, 19 Australia 30,6
20 Slovakia 29,8
21 Switzerland 29,7
22 South Korea 28,7
23 USA 28,3 23 Japan 27,9
24 Turkey 23,7
25 Mexico 19,8

Parados, of course the number of dollars SPENT for a business's goods and services, by far exceeds the number of dollars INVESTED in it. Companies grow from both. High taxes on incomes limit both SPENDING AND INVESTMENT. Limiting both SPENDING AND INVESTMENT limits GPD and employment growth.

To significantly expand or startup their facilities, companies require more money at the time they want to expand or startup than they have accumulated from their net profits or other net income sources. By waiting until they have accumulated enough, they probably will not be able to startup, and expand in time to succeed. Usually, they require far more money than they have at that time obtained after expenses and taxes.

If businesses are successful over time, they usually pay dividends or interest on the money loaned or invested in them by their investors. In some cases, investors do not receive dividends or interest from the money they invested. Instead, investors profit from their investments by selling their equities in businesses whenever they want.

Investors do not invest in or loan money to businesses they think will PROBABLY not profit enough to meet their obligations. High taxes tend to reduce that PROBABILITY.

ican, See the post above yours. Please answer my question in that post.

Frank, I did not invent the words modern, American, or liberal. Nor did I invent the term modern American liberal. That's a term, at least a decade old, that is used to distinguish classical American liberalism from modern American liberalism. However, I think I might be the first to invent the acronym, MAL, for modern American liberals. I did that after being inspired by Foxfyre's invention of the acronym MAC, its definition, and her arguments why modern American conservatism is superior to her and my understanding of what today's liberalism actually is..

I agree with Foxfyre's claim that MACs are very much like CALs (i.e., classical American liberals) like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison.

By the way, I just now invented the CAL acronym.

So Frank, if you are not afraid to do so, define whatever you think today's, contemporary, present, or existing liberalism actually is, and present arguments for why you think it superior to MAC.

No need, ican; most dictionaries carry a very concise definition for terms and acronyms.

Seems to me...if Ican is looking for a definition of an acronym he invented...he should be able to do it on his own.

He is exceptionally good at making up acronyms. Some of his posts are filled with them.

In any case, to ask you as many times as he has to define the acronym which he invented...really is amazing!

Totally expected, and ignored.

But of course, these are people actually trying to sell the idea that American conservatism...modern or otherwise...is like the liberalism of Washington, Jefferson, and Madison.

Get people who think that way into a discussion and you've got just what you were asking for!!!!