What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

You want proof of top down working look no further than Wal-Mart.

The largest employer in the United States. I have no doubt if we could zero out the Walton's taxes it would be a bonanza for the workforce. Subsidizing 90% of their employees with food stamps, and welfare is just not enough to give us the job push we really need.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFnT4AbJLrw
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
Another easily disproven knuckledragger talking point. Tell me Fishy, if 22M jobs were created because of a tech "bubble"....why didn't we lose 22M jobs once it burst? Answer = because that's not what was driving the economy!

Next, I know your attraction to Bush policies is well documented, but what exactly did the "lefties" propose upon taking over in 2007 that drove up the deficit? Since you brought it up, you get to supply proof! This ought to be good, especially when he tries to pawn off the unfunded prescription drug benefit and unfunded NCLB onto the Dems....:D Not to mention the Iraq war. :eek:
Click to expand...

Talk about talking points, one I've seen you type about 10 times... Technology CLEARLY drove the economy. And if you believe that technology was a completely independent event that went completely gone as a result of the "tech bust", then I'd like to ask how in the hell you are typing on a message board, or how you're able to shop online, or heck, how you're able to give yourself pleasure at night because certain tactics from the early 90's just don't cut it anymore. ;)

As for your "proof", here you go. http://www.heritage.org/research/re...ongresss-2008-budget-a-tax-and-spending-spree

And a buck says you'll use the Chris Matthews method of discreditation.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
You want proof of top down working look no further than Wal-Mart.

The largest employer in the United States. I have no doubt if we could zero out the Walton's taxes it would be a bonanza for the workforce. Subsidizing 90% of their employees with food stamps, and welfare is just not enough to give us the job push we really need.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFnT4AbJLrw
Click to expand...
That dumb ***** at 6 minutes. :mad:

Almost as asinine as anything ****tarddudefailin08 posts.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Talk about talking points, one I've seen you type about 10 times... Technology CLEARLY drove the economy. And if you believe that technology was a completely independent event that went completely gone as a result of the "tech bust", then I'd like to ask how in the hell you are typing on a message board, or how you're able to shop online, or heck, how you're able to give yourself pleasure at night because certain tactics from the early 90's just don't cut it anymore. ;)

As for your "proof", here you go. http://www.heritage.org/research/re...ongresss-2008-budget-a-tax-and-spending-spree

And a buck says you'll use the Chris Matthews method of discreditation.
Click to expand...

Sooo.....you want to post a study from a biased organization, and then try to cloak it in "oh you're just going to discredit it". No sh ! t Sherlock. A Heritage study has one use, which is to print out and use to wipe your butt if you run out of TP.

Now onto your argument. Tech driving the economy does not equal tech bubble causing all the jobs to be created nor tax revenues realized. In fact, to use a classic Flaggy point, if all the balanced budget was due to an internet bubble, why didn't tax revenues go down to pre-bubble levels once it burst?!?! Yes, I've just put you in a box on this one. Either your past statements were fraudulent, or your answer will be. Don't forget to thank me for this lesson I just taught you. ;)

PS - As you're still "pure" as you like to call it, and I'm a happy married man, I don't think you want to be comparing who's doing what at night in that department. :eek: :D
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
Sooo.....you want to post a study from a biased organization, and then try to cloak it in "oh you're just going to discredit it". No sh ! t Sherlock. A Heritage study has one use, which is to print out and use to wipe your butt if you run out of TP.

Now onto your argument. Tech driving the economy does not equal tech bubble causing all the jobs to be created nor tax revenues realized. In fact, to use a classic Flaggy point, if all the balanced budget was due to an internet bubble, why didn't tax revenues go down to pre-bubble levels once it burst?!?! Yes, I've just put you in a box on this one. Either your past statements were fraudulent, or your answer will be. Don't forget to thank me for this lesson I just taught you. ;)

PS - As you're still "pure" as you like to call it, and I'm a happy married man, I don't think you want to be comparing who's doing what at night in that department. :eek: :D
Click to expand...

You owe me a buck. Also, you still are putting the dot com boom as something completely independent of itself.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Forgot about the dot com boom already? You could have put tax rates at 99%, and you still would have had prosperity because of the watermelon/grape effect. And you know what's funny about Bush II? The deficit in 2007 was effectively the same as that of 2001, and that was before, shocker, left wingers took over the budget.
Click to expand...

If you look at growth in debt, which removes any accounting gimmicks 2001 and 2007 were miles apart. FY 2001 saw the debt grow by $133B, FY 2007 saw the debt grow by $501B. Thats growth of 377%, not exactly "effectively the same."
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
Sooo.....you want to post a study from a biased organization, and then try to cloak it in "oh you're just going to discredit it". No sh ! t Sherlock. A Heritage study has one use, which is to print out and use to wipe your butt if you run out of TP.

Now onto your argument. Tech driving the economy does not equal tech bubble causing all the jobs to be created nor tax revenues realized. In fact, to use a classic Flaggy point, if all the balanced budget was due to an internet bubble, why didn't tax revenues go down to pre-bubble levels once it burst?!?! Yes, I've just put you in a box on this one. Either your past statements were fraudulent, or your answer will be. Don't forget to thank me for this lesson I just taught you. ;)

PS - As you're still "pure" as you like to call it, and I'm a happy married man, I don't think you want to be comparing who's doing what at night in that department. :eek: :D
Click to expand...

Well, if he's quoting the Heritage Foundation, does that mean Obamacare is good? It was, after all, a Heritage foundation idea in the first place. Obamacare is the Heritage Foundation's answer to HillaryCare.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

The level of ignorance in this country of even the simplest, most fundamental business concept is staggering. :(

Read some of the commentary about the Netflix / Comcast deal in which Netflix will pay Comcast for back-end access to servers so that it can feed its high-bandwidth programming directly out to the Internet: people are saying that Netflix will pass on this cost to its customers (as if that somehow were a "bad" thing).

Well, DOH!

Every business must pass on its costs to its customers, or else it will soon be out of business! :rolleyes:




I guess our school system must be in even worse shape than I realized.....:(
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Won't get implemented because of the lobbyists among other reasons, but the knucks have made a proposal on taxes. http://joeforamerica.com/2014/02/go...ls-new-income-tax-revamp/#b0Tbp6AD8l57w8o3.99
Click to expand...


Not to nitpick flagdude, but this isn't the GOP's proposal, as in its going to get passed by the House. Its one guy who's retiring from his tax writing chairmanship putting forth a proposal as a parting act that will go nowhere in his own party. Kudos to him for putting something out there, but once again his own party won't even bring it to a vote, which is pretty sad.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
The level of ignorance in this country of even the simplest, most fundamental business concept is staggering. :(

Read some of the commentary about the Netflix / Comcast deal in which Netflix will pay Comcast for back-end access to servers so that it can feed its high-bandwidth programming directly out to the Internet: people are saying that Netflix will pass on this cost to its customers (as if that somehow were a "bad" thing).

Well, DOH!

Every business must pass on its costs to its customers, or else it will soon be out of business! :rolleyes:




I guess our school system must be in even worse shape than I realized.....:(
Click to expand...

I don't think the world is quite as simplistic as you make it out to be. Businesses can't always pass every incremental cost onto customers. Sometimes they either need to become more efficient or accept less profit in the face of rising costs, particularly if there's the availability of substitute products, or if demand fluctuates with price.

For example, if oil companies tried to charge 10 bucks a gallon for gas, people would drive less or take the bus. Or worse, change their behavior by purchasing more fuel efficient cars.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
The level of ignorance in this country of even the simplest, most fundamental business concept is staggering. :(

Read some of the commentary about the Netflix / Comcast deal in which Netflix will pay Comcast for back-end access to servers so that it can feed its high-bandwidth programming directly out to the Internet: people are saying that Netflix will pass on this cost to its customers (as if that somehow were a "bad" thing).

Well, DOH!

Every business must pass on its costs to its customers, or else it will soon be out of business! :rolleyes:




I guess our school system must be in even worse shape than I realized.....:(
Click to expand...

Sometimes I really love the simplicity of business. If you add value, feel free to raise the price. If you raise the price, you better be adding value or your customers will bolt. Tinker with your business at your own risk...yet...change or die. Business is full of tough decisions...which makes it very interesting.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

5mn_Major said:
Sometimes I really love the simplicity of business. If you add value, feel free to raise the price. If you raise the price, you better be adding value or your customers will bolt. Tinker with your business at your own risk...yet...change or die. Business is full of tough decisions...which makes it very interesting.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no kidding. Businesses can charge whatever they want and pay employees whatever they want. They can lobby for a zeroing of their corporate income tax, and throw chemicals into any water they can find.

Normal folks can just go about their day eating their **** sandwich.

The comcast/netflix deal is bad for business and collusion of the highest order. The Internet is not their personal playground.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

If there is any sort of anomaly to your business's current happenings, you must make an adjustment in order to maximize your return, and one particular adjustment is not always the correct answer. This is the key behind any sort of economic curve, including the Laffer curve that I have brought up before. The important thing is to know where you stand so you know how to adjust. It is a fact, though, that any sort of expense must be offset by revenue.

Netflix and Comcast is a little interesting because of product dependencies. Let's take a look at the product. A 30-minute presentation on Netflix runs about 1GB in size. In my review of daily bandwidth usage (my girlfriend has a subscription while I do not, and we do watch stuff when she's over here), I find that Netflix runs about six times as much bandwidth as Youtube on average. Can you adjust quality? Sure, you could, but we'll take this example because I have solid numbers. When an ISP is either throttling your connection or charging you by the GB, obviously the receipt of a quality product is an issue. By doing this deal, Netflix is assuring that it will retain Comcast customers and Comcast assures that its customers will not switch to another provider, such as FiOS. It also gives some good advertising for customers on the fence for the products because of bandwidth concerns. The value is clear in and of itself, but I'm not seeing too much of an upcharge for subscription cost because it will be offset by added subscribers.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, no kidding. Businesses can charge whatever they want and pay employees whatever they want. They can lobby for a zeroing of their corporate income tax, and throw chemicals into any water they can find.

Normal folks can just go about their day eating their **** sandwich.

The comcast/netflix deal is bad for business and collusion of the highest order. The Internet is not their personal playground.
Click to expand...

Where you do you get the idea that a business can charge whatever they'd like for a product? Companies are subject to the supply and demand curves just like everyone else is. If they raise their prices, the quantity demanded is going to shrink, meaning fewer people are going to consume that product. If Netflix is okay with fewer subscribers because the higher price ultimately leads to greater profits, then that's their perrogative. If you're not okay with it, then don't subscribe.

Unless government has granted a monopoly, there's no way a business can act with impunity. Raising prices to create greater profits will lead to new competition which will then bring prices back in line with where they should be. After all, if an enterprising person sees someone charging $50 for something they can make and sell for $35 while turning a profit, then you're going to see new competition. If there is a government decreed monopoly, that company is subject to pricing regulations and oversight. Nothing you've said in pricing and profit is true in the least.

As for the Comcast/Netflix situation, Netflix had to come to some sort of a deal with an ISP, and will likely continue to do the same with other ISPs. Netflix uses roughly 33% of bandwidth during peak usage periods and other ISPs have started throttling back Netflix's data transfer speeds in repsonse. You're going to see more of these deals being made if Netflix wants to guarantee a certain level of service to their end-users.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, no kidding. Businesses can charge whatever they want and pay employees whatever they want. They can lobby for a zeroing of their corporate income tax, and throw chemicals into any water they can find.
Click to expand...

Taken directly from your vast personal experience as a successful business person?? :rolleyes:
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
Taken directly from your vast personal experience as a successful business person?? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Anyone who has worked for smaller companies like I have my entire life and consulted on as many projects for as many companies as I have has the requisite experience. That being said I may have used some hyperbole and facetiousness in my posting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top