Saturday, January 16, 2010

Republican Party To Marry Wall Street Bankers

Republican Party chairman Michael Steele, G.O.P. congressmen, and Massachusetts' Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown yesterday pledged to marry Wall Street bankers.

"Oooh, they're so big they can't fail," Republican spokesmen said.

The happy coupling expects to horde for themselves $117 billion in bailout money owed to U.S. taxpayers and then honeymoon in Washington, D.C.


Anonymous said...

Funny. I hope they'll be very unhappy with my money.

ross said...

It's not because of who it is that this tax is opposed. It's because of what it is.

The folks ultimately pay the tax. Not the business.

And, the tax includes those banks who have already paid their 'loan' back too? Curiously enough (not really) it does not include union-heavy industries that have also received 'bailout money.' Wazzupwidat?

This is just another example of, like Winston Churchill said, standing in a bucket and trying to lift yourself up by the handle.

What the majority party and The White House have not learned is that laws of economics do not listen nor respond to laws of politicians.

Taking money out of the private sector via taxes leaves less money in the private sector to be used to fuel any sort of economic recovery.

That's what is wrong with Obama's world view on economics. He thinks he is stimulating the economy by taking money and spending it. That is short term only, and not sustainable. (free societies don't behave that way) Long-term sustainable growth happens when people have money of their own to spend, in their own businesses, and for their own households. Taxes simply and effectively drain that money out of use.

Which is why reducing taxes leaves money available for spending that leads to real, sustainable growth. It is also easily demagogued as 'tax cuts for the rich.'

Anonymous said...

blah, tax cuts, blah, tax cuts, blah.

what else you got?

ross said...

Anon. Below are some multiple choice questions to consider.

Income is generated by:

1. Private enterprise
2. Government

Along the same line. The money that government gets via taxes comes from:

1. Private enterprise
2. Government

When government takes money out of the private sector via taxes, what effect does it have?

1. Takes money from their business.
2. Puts money into their business.

The economy is boosted when:

1. The government takes money out of the economy via taxes and spends it as it sees fit.

2. The government leaves as much money as possible in the private sector to be used by the private sector to spend as it sees fit.

Money generated by businesses belongs to:

1. The business owners and investors.
2. The government.


Capitalism pays for Socialism: T/F

Depending on how you answer these questions should explain why it is always taxes, taxes, taxes that effect, either negatively or positively, economic activity, AND whether the form of economic system you prefer is free-market capitalism or some form of socialist/fascist amalgamation.

If you prefer the latter, then there is this thing called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that must first be abolished.

Anonymous said...

Free market capitalism is great, except when it isn't. Like the last 30 years or so. No regulation, no oversight, just a free for all for the big boys with no accountability to the tax payer. Sorry, not gonna play your game, Ross.

What exactly does Wall Street make?

What is it that WalMart is selling?

Yeah, gotta love that free market crap.