Another Republican-state's "cut taxes and watch the economy grow success story - NOT!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,229
14,927
136
It sure looks like Meghan is not saying what you think he is saying.

Apparently the state is spending money on getting companies to come to LA. Further, he raised taxes on some, and lowered them on others. How does that fit the logic that lowering taxes frees up capital for investment?

Ill grant you that Republicans are not for lower taxes, just lower for the wealthy, but the implication of this thread is that lowering taxes as a general rule does not work. That is not what was done here, and its not what was done in Kansas. So...what is your point?

No democrat or anyone on this forum has said lowering taxes, in general, doesn't work, Republicans not only think it does but their whole economic policy centers around lowering taxes. Taxes are simply part of the many tools governments can and should use to affect the economy. The solutions are nuanced which is why Righties have problems understanding them.

The point is, Republicans, time and time again prove they they don't know shit about the economy.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
No democrat or anyone on this forum has said lowering taxes, in general, doesn't work, Republicans not only think it does but their whole economic policy centers around lowering taxes. Taxes are simply part of the many tools governments can and should use to affect the economy. The solutions are nuanced which is why Righties have problems understanding them.

The point is, Republicans, time and time again prove they they don't know shit about the economy.

If Republicans are for lowering taxes, why do they so often do things that raise taxes on people other than the top?

The implication of this thread is that Republicans are for cutting taxes across the board, and they are not. They love to increase spending and then finding crafty ways to tax everyone but the top for it. They only pretend to be for lower taxes, but when they get into office, that shit goes out the window.

Also, you say that lowering taxes is part of the Republican idea, but that they do not understand how to do it. I think they do, but they just want to pay a different group of friends than the other side. Both sides wants to help their friends and not their non-friends.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,229
14,927
136
If Republicans are for lowering taxes, why do they so often do things that raise taxes on people other than the top?

The implication of this thread is that Republicans are for cutting taxes across the board, and they are not. They love to increase spending and then finding crafty ways to tax everyone but the top for it. They only pretend to be for lower taxes, but when they get into office, that shit goes out the window.

Also, you say that lowering taxes is part of the Republican idea, but that they do not understand how to do it. I think they do, but they just want to pay a different group of friends than the other side. Both sides wants to help their friends and not their non-friends.

You are correct, I should have clarified or maybe I was irrationally trying to give Republicans more credit than they deserve.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
You are correct, I should have clarified or maybe I was irrationally trying to give Republicans more credit than they deserve.

Both have friends, and both love doing favors for their friends. I don't think the Republicans are the party of lower taxes that people think though, because they so often do not lower taxes. Even in Kansas, they do things that dont really lower taxes for people, just a few select groups.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Funny how you and even him, as a matter of fact, NO ONE (nada, zip) in this thread could say my links from NOLA.com and other well known sources (neither liberal or conservative), that listed multiple reasons why the state is in such bad shape - supporting my assertions, were wrong. Of course, it is because of the big bad Republicans solely, right? Empty minds look for simple answers indeed.

As you said before, in your own words "empty argument is empty".

So let's turn it around, shall we? Are you saying that LA Repubs have acted in a fiscally responsible manner, that they took steps to counteract a deteriorating situation?

If not, then all of your dancing around is pretty pointless.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
So let's turn it around, shall we? Are you saying that LA Repubs have acted in a fiscally responsible manner, that they took steps to counteract a deteriorating situation?

If not, then all of your dancing around is pretty pointless.

You obviously could NOT read because this is what I wrote in my very first post in this thread =

How stupid can you get when you lost a bunch of taxpayers because of the storm but went ahead and increase the spending anyway plus tax cut (such as Stelly Plan).

and then in another post after that =

Did you see me offer any excuses for Republicans?

Still nothing about disputing my multiple links from well known sources that support my assertions? Nothing? "empty argument is empty" indeed.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It sure looks like Meghan is not saying what you think he is saying.

Apparently the state is spending money on getting companies to come to LA. Further, he raised taxes on some, and lowered them on others. How does that fit the logic that lowering taxes frees up capital for investment?

Ill grant you that Republicans are not for lower taxes, just lower for the wealthy, but the implication of this thread is that lowering taxes as a general rule does not work. That is not what was done here, and its not what was done in Kansas. So...what is your point?

I can't find anything in the linked piece saying taxes were raised at all but rather cut systematically & a lot of cushy negative income business incentives put in place.
 

squirrel dog

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,564
48
91
$20 a barrel oil brought this out . $100 a barrel oil and the discussion would be on a different topic .
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,528
5,045
136
After Jindal, Louisiana reels from corporate tax giveaways

Near the end of his eight years as Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal, a tax-slashing conservative and presidential hopeful, acknowledged that the state's business tax breaks had gone too far.


"The truth is, we have a system of corporate welfare," Jindal said during an April speech to legislators.


The comment resonates now as the state faces its worst budget crisis in three decades - largely because of the soaring cost of subsidies, as well as personal income tax cuts, championed by Jindal.


Business tax subsidies peaked in 2012, when the state exempted 88 percent of corporate income taxes, or about $1.8 billion. It has exceeded 80 percent since then, according to the Louisiana Department of Revenue.





In 2008, when Jindal became governor at 36, he was a rising GOP star, often mentioned as a potential presidential candidate. He cultivated that image, staking his political fortunes on a platform of slashing taxes, dismantling big government and attracting business.



The next year, Jindal helped push through legislation to cut personal income taxes and worked to enhance Louisiana's already robust corporate tax breaks.



In July of 2009, he signed bills that created or expanded nine tax credits to sectors including film, port cargo and infrastructure. The credits are typically worth 20 to 40 percent of a company's in-state spending, or in some cases spending on payroll or research.


In all, annual corporate tax exemptions rose during Jindal's term by about $1 billion, to $1.96 billion in 2014, according to state data.

Many of Jindal's political successes had consequences for Louisiana's budget. A state-commissioned study found that film tax credits, for example, cost the state an estimated $171 million in 2014.

Falling oil prices and personal income tax cuts also played major roles in the crisis, according to state data. Oil-related revenues are projected to drop by nearly $400 million this fiscal year, the data shows. Personal income tax breaks pushed by Jindal and predecessor, Democrat Kathleen Blanco, reduced revenues by about $800 million annually, said Albrecht, the state economist.

As Louisiana faced mounting shortfalls, Jindal sought solutions that didn't involve raising taxes.



“Despite the fact that the state was hemorrhaging money, he just wanted to keep his tax virginity” for his presidential campaign, said Edward Chervenak, a political science professor at the University of New Orleans, echoing a theme common among Democrats and Republicans alike in the state.


Having signed a pledge not to raise taxes, Jindal turned to one-time fixes, such as offering tax amnesty to delinquent taxpayers and raiding state trust funds. That included drawing down $520 million from the Medicaid Trust Fund for the Elderly and $540 million from a reserve fund for state employee healthcare, according to Republican state Treasurer John Kennedy.


Jindal failed last year to sell the state's tobacco settlement, worth $1.2 billion over time, for an upfront lump sum of $750 million - a move Kennedy compared to "a junkie selling his TV or smartphone to buy another fix."


LOUISIANA-BUDGET.jpg



http://www.reuters.com/article/us-louisiana-budget-politics-insight-idUSKCN0WA2OG
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,060
48,070
136
It sure looks like Meghan is not saying what you think he is saying.

Apparently the state is spending money on getting companies to come to LA. Further, he raised taxes on some, and lowered them on others. How does that fit the logic that lowering taxes frees up capital for investment?

Ill grant you that Republicans are not for lower taxes, just lower for the wealthy, but the implication of this thread is that lowering taxes as a general rule does not work. That is not what was done here, and its not what was done in Kansas. So...what is your point?

Lowering taxes was definitely what was done in both LA and Kansas.

Lower taxes can be helpful, but not when they create huge deficits.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Lowering taxes was definitely what was done in both LA and Kansas.

Lower taxes can be helpful, but not when they create huge deficits.

So you support Keynesian stimulus except when you don't, such as any time it comes in the form of tax cuts instead of borrowing and increased spending.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Lowering taxes was definitely what was done in both LA and Kansas.

Lower taxes can be helpful, but not when they create huge deficits.

But that is the issue here. This thread is about how lowering taxes fails, but that is a super dumb way to look at this. Taxes were cut but spending was not. Spending in LA was actually increased a lot for select groups. The whole idea of cutting taxes is to remove barriers that are limiting investment and economic activity in a free market. The government spending breaks that firstly, and 2nd it racks up huge debt that eventually will result in more taxes. In no way should this be seen as a test of lowering taxes, because everything else was fucked with.

I have no problem saying that what was done in LA was stupid and Republicans are stupid. That shit is easy to say. I just find it annoying how smart people get caught up in this political bullshit. Like I pointed out before, if this were a scientific study on global warming, and you looked at one variable and ignored the changes in all others, you could be called an idiot. On this thread, its a good thing.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,060
48,070
136
But that is the issue here. This thread is about how lowering taxes fails, but that is a super dumb way to look at this. Taxes were cut but spending was not. Spending in LA was actually increased a lot for select groups. The whole idea of cutting taxes is to remove barriers that are limiting investment and economic activity in a free market. The government spending breaks that firstly, and 2nd it racks up huge debt that eventually will result in more taxes. In no way should this be seen as a test of lowering taxes, because everything else was fucked with.

I have no problem saying that what was done in LA was stupid and Republicans are stupid. That shit is easy to say. I just find it annoying how smart people get caught up in this political bullshit. Like I pointed out before, if this were a scientific study on global warming, and you looked at one variable and ignored the changes in all others, you could be called an idiot. On this thread, its a good thing.

I agree that their problem was at least in part not lowering spending as well, but lowering spending to the degree necessary to pay for those tax cuts was probably always impossible. I would also be more inclined to look at this issue more holistically if Republicans weren't promising more of the exact same policy of tax cuts without spending cuts going forward. This isn't an aberration, this is the plan as I have sincerely never seen a tax proposal put forth by Republicans that actually does what you say.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think you're wrong, but I think you're describing an alternative that doesn't exist and will never exist. America's conservatives simply don't function that way.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I agree that their problem was at least in part not lowering spending as well, but lowering spending to the degree necessary to pay for those tax cuts was probably always impossible. I would also be more inclined to look at this issue more holistically if Republicans weren't promising more of the exact same policy of tax cuts without spending cuts going forward. This isn't an aberration, this is the plan as I have sincerely never seen a tax proposal put forth by Republicans that actually does what you say.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think you're wrong, but I think you're describing an alternative that doesn't exist and will never exist. America's conservatives simply don't function that way.

We are in 100% agreement that Republicans would rather lower taxes and not cut spending. Its a political ploy to pander to their voters. Republicans are not for cutting taxes and cutting spending. Dems are willing to raise taxes for their spending, Republicans are not.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,749
4,558
136
Sounds about right. It was not just cutting taxes, but also the business subsidies.

But, this thread will stand as proof that cutting taxes to free up constrained capital does not work. Who could have guessed that if you spend more than you take in that eventually you would run out of money?

Reaganomics ftl.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Reaganomics ftl.

And because of bad policy, it convinces people that cutting taxes is bad, and its not. We tax the shit out of society, even here in the US. Somewhere between 25%-30% of our GDP is collected as taxes. We are not far behind Japan. When you look at spending per GDP, the US almost catches both Japan and Canada. Our taxes are very high, but nobody seems to understand that. We have been raising our taxes slowly over time, and economic growth has been going down.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
We are in 100% agreement that Republicans would rather lower taxes and not cut spending. Its a political ploy to pander to their voters. Republicans are not for cutting taxes and cutting spending. Dems are willing to raise taxes for their spending, Republicans are not.

Winner!

What we're left with is that Repub tax policy is either delusion or deception, perhaps some combination of both. There's a price to be paid for decent governance & a lower limit to what that really is. The fact that they'll beat revenues down to the point where they get to loot trust funds & borrow more money tells us that they obviously have different priorities.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,537
6,975
136
Every time I see a situation like this, well, let's just say that the putrid, rank odor of corrupted politicians precedes the sighting by a country mile.

And these assholes keep getting voted back into office.

Perfect.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Winner!

What we're left with is that Repub tax policy is either delusion or deception, perhaps some combination of both. There's a price to be paid for decent governance & a lower limit to what that really is. The fact that they'll beat revenues down to the point where they get to loot trust funds & borrow more money tells us that they obviously have different priorities.

And their shit is used to justify the other side and their shit. We are left with parties that shit fling and yet everyone just eats it up. We have shit flingers and shit eaters.

Both sides have friends with very expensive tastes.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,442
10,333
136
Winner!

What we're left with is that Repub tax policy is either delusion or deception, perhaps some combination of both. There's a price to be paid for decent governance & a lower limit to what that really is. The fact that they'll beat revenues down to the point where they get to loot trust funds & borrow more money tells us that they obviously have different priorities.

Why raise taxes when you can raid a pension fund.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,060
48,070
136
And their shit is used to justify the other side and their shit. We are left with parties that shit fling and yet everyone just eats it up. We have shit flingers and shit eaters.

Both sides have friends with very expensive tastes.

I really think the idea that both parties are mirror images of each other is badly wrong. You simply don't see Democrats float proposals like this almost ever.

It's one of my primary (har!) complaints with the Sanders campaign. He has started to rely on the same magical thinking that has infected the brains of American conservatives for years.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
And because of bad policy, it convinces people that cutting taxes is bad, and its not. We tax the shit out of society, even here in the US. Somewhere between 25%-30% of our GDP is collected as taxes. We are not far behind Japan. When you look at spending per GDP, the US almost catches both Japan and Canada. Our taxes are very high, but nobody seems to understand that. We have been raising our taxes slowly over time, and economic growth has been going down.

You're chasing a rainbow. Until very recently, Reaganomic tax policy has generally shifted the overall burden down the scale providing the Job Creator! class with ample funds & opportunity to create growth in this country. Which they have done, no doubt, but not in a fashion that offsets the downward shift of that tax burden or distributes the rewards in an equitable fashion. That model simply fails to deliver to the middle class. It quit working some while back.

If you can't acknowledge that you merely invite more of the same.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I really think the idea that both parties are mirror images of each other is badly wrong. You simply don't see Democrats float proposals like this almost ever.

It's one of my primary (har!) complaints with the Sanders campaign. He has started to rely on the same magical thinking that has infected the brains of American conservatives for years.

They are different in that one side does not try and pay for their spending increases. Both are funneling money to their collective interests though. Those interests are very often the same groups, but sometimes they are different.

I'm not talking about Dems giving money to minorities and Republicans giving it to whites BS either. Both sides have supporters that want returns on their investments. Republicans love the military industrial complex, while Dems love wall street. Although both have been going after that finance money as of late.

Both sides love to help their friends.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
You're chasing a rainbow. Until very recently, Reaganomic tax policy has generally shifted the overall burden down the scale providing the Job Creator! class with ample funds & opportunity to create growth in this country. Which they have done, no doubt, but not in a fashion that offsets the downward shift of that tax burden or distributes the rewards in an equitable fashion. That model simply fails to deliver to the middle class. It quit working some while back.

If you can't acknowledge that you merely invite more of the same.

its easy to acknowledge that if you reduce burdens on the top, but not anywhere else, that the top will benefit the most. I am not in favor of trickle down.

That has nothing to do with reducing taxes though. You cant lower them on just one section and expect magic. That logic would be hold back everyone but a few and somehow those few will get a better outcome and give it away to those under them.

The way all ships will rise is by creating more thinks in the economy. All they did was to give those a the top more power to keep more wealth. Those under them cant compete with the ease of capital that the top has so no competition.

Free up markets is what I am in favor of, not free just the top.