Re: Drill Now for oil

On Jun 23, 10:33 pm, JosephKK <quiettechb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:47:50 -0700, John Larkin



<jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:59:24 -0700 (PDT), MooseFET
<kensm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 23, 3:46 pm, krw <k...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <588f95a8-acda-4c1f-91ad-
c64c9583a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, dagmargoodb...@xxxxxxxxx
says...

On Jun 22, 12:11 pm, JeffM <jef...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:
Vote Democrat... it's good for the consulting biz.

Never mind that The Left's *Tax and spend*
is preferable to The New Right's *Borrow and spend*.

Agreed, reluctantly, because it's reduced to "tax
and borrow and spend" in practice.

Better still: don't borrow & don't spend so much.

But if you're going to spend it, you should collect it,
otherwise it's just a hidden tax, due later with interest.

Disagree. If you kill the golden goose... We are on the negative
slope of the Laffer curve, so increased taxes mean *less* revenue to

It has been discredited for over years now. People have been trying
to find proof of it in the real data and it never seems to show up.
Clinton raised taxes and the economy rocketed ahead. Bush cut them
and slow growth was the result. Clintons tax increase increased the
amount of money the government got and Bushes decreased it.

The tax revenues went up because of the bogus dot.com boom and the
Enron-type scandals, enabled by Clinton-promoted changes in banking
and securities regulation, the same changes that gave us the current
real-estate fiasco. Bush inherited the falling edge of that boom, the
crash.

Increasing tax rates most always increases short-term tax revenue. But
wait a while, and the longer-term compensations and damages settle in.
Just consider the case of 100% tax on corporate profits.

Corporate profits shouldn't be taxed at all.

The time constants for stuff like this is complex, like a diffusion
phenomenon, but must be in the decade sort of range.

John

I think you should check the timing better. Dot.com went dot.bomb
near the beginning of Clinton years.

The Clinton boom was from
balancing the budget.

The Bush recession is straightforwardly the
result of his war deficits.

Bush required FERC to NOT respond to
Enron until it was blown and then some. If you think there was some
prior changes in laws or regulations leading this, you are asked to
show it. And keep track of who was in charge of Congress at which
time, the President cannot Legislate nor regulate.

I think your timing's off here...the Clinton internet bubble started
going in 1994, popped at the end of 2000 into early 2001.

Clinton did not balance the budget--he spent at the usual rate, but
enjoyed much higher revenues, plus was able to cash in on the post
Cold War peace dividend by slashing the military[1]. Gridlock
restrained spending nicely too.

[1] saving a trillion dollars over the course of his tenure. See Table
7, "Comparisons", link below.

A few figures here (compare the revenue changes from year-to-year for
each time period):
http://members.aol.com/xspamnot/private/us_budget_analysis.htm

You'll see revenue dove instantly in 2001 as Bush took office, and
before any of his policies could take effect.

You'll also see Mr. Bush has been spending VERY prodigiously on social
programs.


As far as Enron, they were a go-go-go product of the internet bubble,
were established in that time, and under the regulation of that day.
Ken Lay was tight with the powers-that-were, including Mr. C.

Cheers,
James Arthur
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Drill Now for oil
    ... is preferable to The New Right's *Borrow and spend*. ... otherwise it's just a hidden tax, ... Clinton raised taxes and the economy rocketed ahead. ... Bush inherited the falling edge of that boom, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Even Republicans dont like Bush ...
    ... the economy began to grow again. ... but an anomaly for the Bush presidency overall ... The minimum wage was raised & it added tax cuts for the poor. ... This is what Bill Clinton inherited. ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Re: OT:Who killed the economy?
    ... If you want to take a look at tax revenues during the Clinton and Bush ... Clinton Married making 60K - tax $16,800 ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Obama - Wright -the truth
    ... Since upper income ... revenue by measures such as taxing hedge fund managers at the regular ... under the Bush administration) and other measures for raising revenue ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT:Who killed the economy?
    ... If you want to take a look at tax revenues during the Clinton and Bush ... Clinton Married making 60K - tax $16,800 ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
Quantcast