**** Elections thread *****

[BananaStand]

So if you're arguing in favor of consolidation, then you would agree that Trickle Down Economics was a lie..

I'm not....and I don't.

#2 was probably my worst worded paragraph.

No, you're second attempt at it was your worst worded paragraph. Still not seeing your point. There was a revolt in El Salvador. Nice story.

#3 Purchasing power increasing, over remaining stagnant would be good for Americans as a whole. We've tried 4 decades of stagnant wages for Americans

Are you talking about purchasing power, or wages. Suppose a lawyer's salary earns him 3x the purchasing power of a truck driver. Why should that ever change? It would only change if the market demanded that truck driving require 8 years of higher education.

#4 #'s of dollars wise yes, not % of GDP though.

I don't see how that's possible. What numbers are you using? GDP growth is in the toilet, and Barry borrowed more than anyone ever.

Our economic mobility is vastly inferior to that of Western Europe.

False. If you have numbers that can prove that, I suspect it's a symptom of having less income inequality. In other words, if the gap between rich and poor is really small, it's easier to move from one end of the scale to the other. In america, 2/3 of the bottom fifth of earners, move out of that quintile within a generation. And people at the top move down too, including 8 percent who fall from the top quintile all the way to the bottom.

Congressional Budget Office reports that over the last 30 years, rich people's incomes grew 200 percent while poor people's income rose 50%. It's the growth that matters, not the disparity. Securities/Investments grow faster than wages. And that's ok. It's not hurting anybody. The rich are not getting rich at the expense of the poor.

if he implements his tax plan, and we go from an annual deficit of $552 billion, back to well in the $trillions, that's going to communicate a message to the bond market.

C'mon man, bond traders can read the paper. They know what's coming. The market hasn't tanked. Quite the opposite actually.

I think I'm well within my right to believe, that tax cuts for very wealthy people and massive amounts of borrowing money to finance those tax cuts, can, and should be associated with credit downgrades for the states implementing them.

You're well within your right to believe anything you want. That doesn't make it true though. I think you're being fairly glib with your assessment of why and how credit ratings get adusted. If a business borrows money to finance expansion that will turn into increased cash flow, hence paying off the debt....should their credit be downgraded? I would say no.

On the other hand, what if the business borrowed money in order to give everyone raises, except for the executives. All the rank and file got a boost in their income. But there was no return for the business. Productivity didn't go up. Profits didn't increase (they decrease because expenses went up). And the business has no mechanism to pay back the debt....should their credit rating change? I would say yes.

The former example is akin to cutting taxes for producers, encouraging them to produce more, create more jobs, and grow the economy. The latter example is akin to Obama's stimulus packages and tax cuts which actually resulted in millions of people leaving the workforce, wages remaining stale, and GDP circling the toilet.