What Will You Miss About Bush?

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: winnar111
I'll miss my money and the significant income increase I've gotten since 2000.

Assuming you actually had a signficant income increase since 2000, do you really credit Bush for it?

Well Clinton created the wealth

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not this fucking twat again...

Look, son, i am not going to do this again, read my previous reply.

AS A NATION you got fucking stinking wealthy, but you don't give a fuck about your nation, do you, not a piss, you just care about you, right?

Now shut the fuck up twat.

Aww... look who holds a grudge :laugh: . Grow up, child. Really. You sound pathetic.

Let's see if I can make a point without slathering it in foul language: Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I have no idea why you have a President, if they spend trillions, it's still not them doing it.

Fucked as fucked can be, you are, over in Britain, something like that cost Blair his status in weeks.

 

[fallout man]

I'll miss Osama bin Laden's frequent video releases from "the gates of hell," which he just kept on releasing while being hunted down and smoked out--dead or alive.

Let's roll.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

 

[dawp]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

Only for themselves.

I'll miss him being a target of late nite comedians.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

 

[Insomniator]

Uhh you do know that the success of the 90's was Obama's doing (even back then) and the failure currently is clearly Regan's fault right?

I thought everyone knew that...

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

I'm tired and you're boring.

Cliffnote that or i won't read it.

Edit: I don't say that to be a prick, i really won't read all of that so if you want some kind of response, you'll have to condense it.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

Well, the problem with the question is that it's open to rather ambiguous interpretation. I don't necessarily believe the POTUS has the ability to create wealth as much as he has the ability to impede it.

Contrary to a statement JoS made earlier, high taxes can sap wealth from a nation, and there are fairly basic mathematical equations that demonstrate this. The academic term for this is the "tax wedge". Excessive taxes suppress productivity incentives and voila - GDP takes a hit.

Micro 101

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

I'm tired and you're boring.

Cliffnote that or i won't read it.

LMAO

You're a joke, guy. Really. :laugh:

Since you can't be bothered to READ, you twit, let's start with this: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it?

[edit]

You know what, strike that. If you want to act all illiterate because you have mudholes on your back, that's your business. I replied to your nonsense. If you can't be bothered to defend yourself, then fuck off .

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

You honestly think a die hard partisan who would vote for him if it meant that he was going to get killed would answer that honestly?

I think it is fairly obvious what Clinton did for the US and i think twats like this twat should be ashamed of themselves for denying it.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Well Clinton created the wealth

Please explain.

significant structural changes occurred in industrial production leading to improved worker productivity.

in economic terms:

y = z*f(k^[c], L^[1-c])

the z increased (as well as the k, and the L, but those are side stories)

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

I'm tired and you're boring.

Cliffnote that or i won't read it.

LMAO

You're a joke, guy. Really. :laugh:

Since you can't be bothered to READ, you twit, let's start with this: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it?

I already answered that question, READ and COMPREHEND or were you homeschooled and only learned to know the signs of Satan?

I'm sorry, i really don't like twats like you, i just can't help it, you bring out the worst in me, or not the worst.

In Afghanistan, all is calm and our fucking planes have not arrieved.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

You honestly think a die hard partisan who would vote for him if it meant that he was going to get killed would answer that honestly?

I think it is fairly obvious what Clinton did for the US and i think twats like this twat should be ashamed of themselves for denying it.

Let me ask you a third time: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it? Try to be a grown boy for 30 seconds and answer the question without whining about twats or the length of a post. Either put up or shut up.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Well Clinton created the wealth

Please explain.

significant structural changes occurred in industrial production leading to improved worker productivity.

in economic terms:

y = z*f(k^[c], L^[1-c])

the z increased (as well as the k, and the L, but those are side stories)

And THERE is that quote i was looking for.

Thank you Mike!

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Vic
Just that ODS is gonna make BDS look like nothing more than a case of the sniffles.

ODS is the big new things around here.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Well Clinton created the wealth

Please explain.

Calmer climate and everyone felt safer, industry blooming, people bought with own money, investments in new production was daily news and supported actions, financed research.

No big spending outside the US.

Keep in mind that i'm a Brit though.

I'm trying to find statistics online (must be googling the wrong thing), but I thought credit card debt in the US went up drastically in the '90s. I think there was an issue with people not being able to accept that they shouldn't buy items.

credit card debt fell between 97 and 2000

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: bozack
I will miss his tax policies, under Obama there will be less of a desire to move up for me as the tax burden will increase, plus I will worry about my industry since socialized heathcare and regulations on prescription drugs really aren't condusive to the industry in which I work...hello mediocrity

Yeah, the repeal of the Bush tax cuts is really gonna discourage me from wanting to make more than $250k/yr. :roll:

You understand how tax brackets work, right? You only pay the higher tax rate on the amount you make above the bracket.

And there are no plans for socialized healthcare.

Someone has a sig about it, i think it was Rainsford that wrote it first.

Something about how being rich keeps being a popular thing even when taxes are raised for them.

you rang?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

You honestly think a die hard partisan who would vote for him if it meant that he was going to get killed would answer that honestly?

I think it is fairly obvious what Clinton did for the US and i think twats like this twat should be ashamed of themselves for denying it.

Let me ask you a third time: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it? Try to be a grown boy for 30 seconds and answer the question without whining about twats or the length of a post. Either put up or shut up.

LOOK THE FUCK ABOVE! I already did.

What the fuck is wrong with your daft arse?

You know, annoying me can lead to bad results.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: bozack
I will miss his tax policies, under Obama there will be less of a desire to move up for me as the tax burden will increase, plus I will worry about my industry since socialized heathcare and regulations on prescription drugs really aren't condusive to the industry in which I work...hello mediocrity

Yeah, the repeal of the Bush tax cuts is really gonna discourage me from wanting to make more than $250k/yr. :roll:

You understand how tax brackets work, right? You only pay the higher tax rate on the amount you make above the bracket.

And there are no plans for socialized healthcare.

Someone has a sig about it, i think it was Rainsford that wrote it first.

Something about how being rich keeps being a popular thing even when taxes are raised for them.

you rang?

Indeed i did my friend, thank you.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

I'm tired and you're boring.

Cliffnote that or i won't read it.

LMAO

You're a joke, guy. Really. :laugh:

Since you can't be bothered to READ, you twit, let's start with this: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it?

I already answered that question, READ and COMPREHEND or were you homeschooled and only learned to know the signs of Satan?

I'm sorry, i really don't like twats like you, i just can't help it, you bring out the worst in me, or not the worst.

In Afghanistan, all is calm and our fucking planes have not arrieved.

Then surely you wouldn't mind quoting your own post. I mean, if you can't be bothered to read a simple reply from me to you, you surely can't expect me to go digging for your "evidence".

Put up or shut up.

By the way, I was not home schooled. But since you asked, I have an undergraduate degree in Ecomomics currently working on my graduate degree and finishing a B.A. in Mathematics (the amount of math required for grad school put be rather close to it to begin with, so I figured what the heck). I also teach several undergraduate Econ courses as part of my graduate work.

I normally don't wave my dick in the wind like that, but I think it's relevant at the moment.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

Eisenhower, via the interstate highway state, for one. TR with the panama canal, etc. Truman and the marshal plan, etc

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Well Clinton created the wealth

Please explain.

Apparently I'm not the only one waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Son, i don't even remember where you are from, what forum was it?

Beats me, but it obviously left an impression. I'm flattered! All I remember of you is that you can't speak two words to someone who disagrees with you without a huge vein popping out of your forehead! I suppose if there's any consolation to anyone subjected to your half-thoughts and venom, it's that you'll soon stroke out.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Lemme see if i got this straight, the US flourished under Clinton, do i have that right? But it wasn't his doing, right?

Ah... the old "correlation = causation"... the Neanderthal's crutch :laugh:

Tell me, "son", precisely what wealth did Clinton create and how?

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
It went to hell under GW, but that wasn't his doing, right? His squandering of trillions had no effect, right?

I'm not sure who you're replying to now, because I made no mention of Bush whatsoever. But since you asked, market corrections began before Clinton even left office. Does that mean Clinton is responsible for the fall? No. Does that mean Bush's hands are clean? No. Does this even address the cash sinkhole that is the war? Absolutely not. But you see, economic scenarios like this aren't nearly as black and white as you need them to be. Understanding them first requires at least a mild degree of objectivity, maturity, and understanding of basic economic principles. Pinning the perceived fiscal success of the 90's squarely on Clinton and the slow tailspin since squarely on Bush demonstrates a complete lack of all three.

I'm tired and you're boring.

Cliffnote that or i won't read it.

LMAO

You're a joke, guy. Really. :laugh:

Since you can't be bothered to READ, you twit, let's start with this: what wealth did Clinton create and how did he do it?

I already answered that question, READ and COMPREHEND or were you homeschooled and only learned to know the signs of Satan?

I'm sorry, i really don't like twats like you, i just can't help it, you bring out the worst in me, or not the worst.

In Afghanistan, all is calm and our fucking planes have not arrieved.

Then surely you wouldn't mind quoting your own post. I mean, if you can't be bothered to read a simple reply from me to you, you surely can't expect me to go digging for your "evidence".

Put up or shut up.

By the way, I was not home schooled. But since you asked, I have an undergraduate degree in Ecomomics currently working on my graduate degree and finishing a B.A. in Mathematics (the amount of math required for grad school put be rather close to it to begin with, so I figured what the heck). I also teach several undergraduate Econ courses as part of my graduate work.

I normally don't wave my dick in the wind like that, but I think it's relevant at the moment.

Son, you were NEVER relevant.

If you can't scroll upwards i suggest you get a better keyboard or mouse.

This is the last you'll hear from me, i can't stand you, i really can't.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: jbourne77
... Clinton created zero wealth. None. He's a textbook example of right place, right time. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said, let alone taught. It's common sense and it's as intuitive as 2 + 2. You can add, can't you?

Has any president created wealth?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I was simply responding to the notion - the gut-busting-laughable notion - that Clinton created wealth. In fact, not only did Clinton not create the wealth of the 90's, said wealth largely never existed anywhere but on paper.

Simple question to gauge your premise.

Has any president from the first george to this last george (thank god we got away from king george, eh?) ever created wealth?

Well, the problem with the question is that it's open to rather ambiguous interpretation. I don't necessarily believe the POTUS has the ability to create wealth as much as he has the ability to impede it.

Contrary to a statement JoS made earlier, high taxes can sap wealth from a nation, and there are fairly basic mathematical equations that demonstrate this. The academic term for this is the "tax wedge". Excessive taxes suppress productivity incentives and voila - GDP takes a hit.

Micro 101

when i got to econ 300, the first thing the prof told us was to forget everything we learned in intro econ, because most of it was either flat out wrong or incredibly naive.