The Nation's Financial Condition

[CU88]

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/418 ... experiment


Failed tax-cut experiment in Kansas should guide national leaders

[Peter Brown]

Let's just hold all of us to the standard of actually having some facts to support our positions, not just ideology.

We all (me included) sometimes get out too far over our skis at times.

I appreciate the challenges when I do.

If I post a toon, a meme, or a link to an article with substantive proofs the right wing immediately dismisses it. All I ask is if these right wingers are so convinced that a source is wrong, show me some proof of any deficiency. But they never do. Instead, all they do is criticize or ignore it. Then when they are challenged to produce evidence, they go silent. It's time for them to produce evidence and then we can possibly have an intelligent exchange on our views. Too bad this was not the standard on LP or it could have been a lot less contentious.

No argument with you in that regard.
Let's just hold all of us to the same standard...I don't think you have any issue with that as you seem quite willing to support your views with data and logic.

You have GOT to be kidding.

Circle-the-Wagons.jpg (35.74 KiB) Viewed 1176 times

[MDlaxfan76]

Let's just hold all of us to the standard of actually having some facts to support our positions, not just ideology.

We all (me included) sometimes get out too far over our skis at times.

I appreciate the challenges when I do.

If I post a toon, a meme, or a link to an article with substantive proofs the right wing immediately dismisses it. All I ask is if these right wingers are so convinced that a source is wrong, show me some proof of any deficiency. But they never do. Instead, all they do is criticize or ignore it. Then when they are challenged to produce evidence, they go silent. It's time for them to produce evidence and then we can possibly have an intelligent exchange on our views. Too bad this was not the standard on LP or it could have been a lot less contentious.

Oh, you want evidence that Democrats are inclined to penalize for-profit business? Seriously?

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/n ... rch-v1.pdf

For 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the top five most fiscally sound states were, in order: Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Florida and Oklahoma.

The five worst states, starting at the bottom: Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Kentucky.

Does that help?

What happened to Kentucky?

Seriously, on balance rural states are net takers of federal $, densely populated states support the less dense.

Yes, there's a correlation between density and "Blue" and vice versa less dense "Red".

There's also a correlation between income and education level between dense counties and less dense. Dense regions have higher incomes and education levels.

Likewise, a correlation between less dense and higher obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Not sure we want to 'blame' poor outcomes of "Red" versus "Blue" policies, but there's indeed a remarkable overlap.

But on 'fiscal soundness' let's remember that the less dense states are typically taking way more from the federal pool than they put in.

[MDlaxfan76]

Let's just hold all of us to the standard of actually having some facts to support our positions, not just ideology.

We all (me included) sometimes get out too far over our skis at times.

I appreciate the challenges when I do.

If I post a toon, a meme, or a link to an article with substantive proofs the right wing immediately dismisses it. All I ask is if these right wingers are so convinced that a source is wrong, show me some proof of any deficiency. But they never do. Instead, all they do is criticize or ignore it. Then when they are challenged to produce evidence, they go silent. It's time for them to produce evidence and then we can possibly have an intelligent exchange on our views. Too bad this was not the standard on LP or it could have been a lot less contentious.

No argument with you in that regard.
Let's just hold all of us to the same standard...I don't think you have any issue with that as you seem quite willing to support your views with data and logic.

You have GOT to be kidding.






Circle-the-Wagons.jpg

Nope.

[Peter Brown]

Oh, you want evidence that Democrats are inclined to penalize for-profit business? Seriously?

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/n ... rch-v1.pdf

For 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the top five most fiscally sound states were, in order: Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Florida and Oklahoma.

The five worst states, starting at the bottom: Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Kentucky.

Does that help?

South Dakota? Where life in the reservations isn't so sweet: ''Many of these counties are in North Dakota, South Dakota and Alaska. And in certain communities such as on the Pine Ridge Reservation, unemployment can exceed 80 percent.''

http://blog.nativepartnership.org/labor ... sparities/


All three along with Kentucky = Republican states

Wait til you hear about unemployment in West Baltimore, a Democrat-run state with passable business environment grading...

Should we throw out Maryland's grade because of that?

[Kismet]

I could keep going all day, but you get the picture. I hope.

Please don't.

[MDlaxfan76]

Oh, you want evidence that Democrats are inclined to penalize for-profit business? Seriously?

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/n ... rch-v1.pdf

For 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the top five most fiscally sound states were, in order: Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Florida and Oklahoma.

The five worst states, starting at the bottom: Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Kentucky.

Does that help?

South Dakota? Where life in the reservations isn't so sweet: ''Many of these counties are in North Dakota, South Dakota and Alaska. And in certain communities such as on the Pine Ridge Reservation, unemployment can exceed 80 percent.''

http://blog.nativepartnership.org/labor ... sparities/


All three along with Kentucky = Republican states

Wait til you hear about unemployment in West Baltimore, a Democrat-run state with passable business environment grading...

Should we throw out Maryland's grade because of that?

Try the full Baltimore SMSA...or the full State.
Or would you rather look at rural southern MD where poverty is sky high?

Gotta look at the full picture.

or are you saying that Kentucky and Alabama etc are "ghettos"?

[Brooklyn]

What happened to Kentucky?

Seriously, on balance rural states are net takers of federal $, densely populated states support the less dense.

Yes, there's a correlation between density and "Blue" and vice versa less dense "Red".

There's also a correlation between income and education level between dense counties and less dense. Dense regions have higher incomes and education levels.

Likewise, a correlation between less dense and higher obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Not sure we want to 'blame' poor outcomes of "Red" versus "Blue" policies, but there's indeed a remarkable overlap.

But on 'fiscal soundness' let's remember that the less dense states are typically taking way more from the federal pool than they put in.

Republicans claim they do not believe in government dependency. But ever so strangely as it may sound, nobody takes more from the government than they do:


https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... ment/2700/


Funny how in the top 20 there are only 2 Blue states.

[Peter Brown]

Let's just hold all of us to the standard of actually having some facts to support our positions, not just ideology.

We all (me included) sometimes get out too far over our skis at times.

I appreciate the challenges when I do.

If I post a toon, a meme, or a link to an article with substantive proofs the right wing immediately dismisses it. All I ask is if these right wingers are so convinced that a source is wrong, show me some proof of any deficiency. But they never do. Instead, all they do is criticize or ignore it. Then when they are challenged to produce evidence, they go silent. It's time for them to produce evidence and then we can possibly have an intelligent exchange on our views. Too bad this was not the standard on LP or it could have been a lot less contentious.

Oh, you want evidence that Democrats are inclined to penalize for-profit business? Seriously?

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/n ... rch-v1.pdf

For 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the top five most fiscally sound states were, in order: Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Florida and Oklahoma.

The five worst states, starting at the bottom: Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Kentucky.

Does that help?

What happened to Kentucky?

Seriously, on balance rural states are net takers of federal $, densely populated states support the less dense.

Yes, there's a correlation between density and "Blue" and vice versa less dense "Red".

There's also a correlation between income and education level between dense counties and less dense. Dense regions have higher incomes and education levels.

Likewise, a correlation between less dense and higher obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Not sure we want to 'blame' poor outcomes of "Red" versus "Blue" policies, but there's indeed a remarkable overlap.

But on 'fiscal soundness' let's remember that the less dense states are typically taking way more from the federal pool than they put in.

This is one of the dumber analyses that the Left trots out. MD: you should be way smarter. In Florida, we understand this issue better than most.

1. Benefits payments to individuals accounted for 62 percent of federal spending in the states in fiscal 2016, trending up. That makes it more difficult to attribute to one state. If a couple from Michigan retires and spends five months each year in Florida, to which state are their Social Security checks attributed? Their legal residence may be in Grand Rapids, but it is quite possible that they spend more of their money in Tampa.

2. Secondly, red states have a disproportionate amount of military bases. Isn't the military for all Americans, or just red state citizens?

3. Third, it sounds like you are upset about progressive taxation. Blue states, due to historical arcs, are wealthier...it stands to reason that the majority of taxes are paid by those with upper incomes from states with higher incomes. Are you arguing against progressive taxation?

[Peter Brown]

What happened to Kentucky?

Seriously, on balance rural states are net takers of federal $, densely populated states support the less dense.

Yes, there's a correlation between density and "Blue" and vice versa less dense "Red".

There's also a correlation between income and education level between dense counties and less dense. Dense regions have higher incomes and education levels.

Likewise, a correlation between less dense and higher obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Not sure we want to 'blame' poor outcomes of "Red" versus "Blue" policies, but there's indeed a remarkable overlap.

But on 'fiscal soundness' let's remember that the less dense states are typically taking way more from the federal pool than they put in.

Republicans claim they do not believe in government dependency. But ever so strangely as it may sound, nobody takes more from the government than they do:


https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... ment/2700/


Funny how in the top 20 there are only 2 Blue states.

Brooklyn obviously is against progressive taxation.

[old salt]

20 years. Florida has been controlled by Republicans for 20 years. So if you buy your Buffalo Bagels, I shouldn't be able to find heavy regulation in Florida, since the R's have had 20 years to make it the most business friendly State in the country.

You sensing where this is headed? Know how many business owners I know in your home State? If I asked them----and I do all the time---- if Florida has minimal regulations, they'd have to pick themselves off the floor from laughing.

I'm left wondering what it is you do for your company that you don't know this.

I always just assumed that Peter Brown was the guy who wrote the 737 Max flight software.

DocBarrister

Software was not the problem. Minor glitches are not uncommon & are routinely corrected with updates.

The cause of the crashes was Boeing's marketing decision to pressure the FAA to certify the MAX as just another 737 that did not require adequate transition/differences training for pilots during introduction.

Properly trained pilots, familiar with the MCAS, would have averted the 2 crashes.

The single AOA sensor vulnerability could have been corrected via FAA Airworthiness Directive.

[Brooklyn]

Brooklyn obviously is against progressive taxation.

Nice evasion again. Thanks for conceding that your Republican red states are government dependent welfare queens.

[MDlaxfan76]

Let's just hold all of us to the standard of actually having some facts to support our positions, not just ideology.

We all (me included) sometimes get out too far over our skis at times.

I appreciate the challenges when I do.

If I post a toon, a meme, or a link to an article with substantive proofs the right wing immediately dismisses it. All I ask is if these right wingers are so convinced that a source is wrong, show me some proof of any deficiency. But they never do. Instead, all they do is criticize or ignore it. Then when they are challenged to produce evidence, they go silent. It's time for them to produce evidence and then we can possibly have an intelligent exchange on our views. Too bad this was not the standard on LP or it could have been a lot less contentious.

Oh, you want evidence that Democrats are inclined to penalize for-profit business? Seriously?

https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/n ... rch-v1.pdf

For 2016, the latest year for which data are available, the top five most fiscally sound states were, in order: Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Florida and Oklahoma.

The five worst states, starting at the bottom: Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Kentucky.

Does that help?

What happened to Kentucky?

Seriously, on balance rural states are net takers of federal $, densely populated states support the less dense.

Yes, there's a correlation between density and "Blue" and vice versa less dense "Red".

There's also a correlation between income and education level between dense counties and less dense. Dense regions have higher incomes and education levels.

Likewise, a correlation between less dense and higher obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Not sure we want to 'blame' poor outcomes of "Red" versus "Blue" policies, but there's indeed a remarkable overlap.

But on 'fiscal soundness' let's remember that the less dense states are typically taking way more from the federal pool than they put in.

This is one of the dumber analyses that the Left trots out. MD: you should be way smarter. In Florida, we understand this issue better than most.

1. Benefits payments to individuals accounted for 62 percent of federal spending in the states in fiscal 2016, trending up. That makes it more difficult to attribute to one state. If a couple from Michigan retires and spends five months each year in Florida, to which state are their Social Security checks attributed? Their legal residence may be in Grand Rapids, but it is quite possible that they spend more of their money in Tampa.

2. Secondly, red states have a disproportionate amount of military bases. Isn't the military for all Americans, or just red state citizens?

3. Third, it sounds like you are upset about progressive taxation. Blue states, due to historical arcs, are wealthier...it stands to reason that the majority of taxes are paid by those with upper incomes from states with higher incomes. Are you arguing against progressive taxation?

No, I'm not worried about progressive taxation, nor am I even bothered by the wealth transfer from dense states (mostly Blue) to less dense (mostly Red).

I'm just objecting to all the whining by those who think Red states are better managed...because they are Red. That's baloney on its face.

You can find good and bad management of either stripe...what concerns me most is when a State is reliably dominated by one party or another, when voters don't really have decent options to choose from and can be predicted to support their 'team' no matter what. That cuts both Red and Blue.

BTW, your #1 is flat silly. It's immaterial to the overall. And in that particular case you suggest, Michigan would look like the 'taker' not Florida. But this is small potatoes in the overall.

[Peter Brown]

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/418 ... experiment


Failed tax-cut experiment in Kansas should guide national leaders

This shibboleth of the Left always reminds me of this: who are you going to trust, me or your lying eyes. Tax cuts and lower taxes are what wage earners flock toward, but tax cuts by themselves do not hollow out an economy.

Blame the not-so-brilliant idea of making all profits from passthrough entities (and for the self-employed) tax exempt.

1. Even the generally anti-tax Tax Foundation testified against the exemption, noting that it incentivizes corporations to restructure as LLCs without making any actual economic improvements. It was projected that 191,000 entities would take advantage of the provision. By 2015, that number had grown to 393,814 – twice as much as expected. The policy change incentivized tens of thousands of Kansans to claim their wages as business income, rather than from employment.

2. Kansas was in recession in 2016 for the same reason Canada also briefly fell into recession the same year: a collapse in oil prices. Kansas ranks 10th in crude oil production, and the price of a barrel of crude fell from around $100 in 2014, to an average of around half that in 2015 and 2016.

It’s foolish to infer any national implications from them. Poorly designed tax cuts don’t prove that tax cuts are bad.

[Peter Brown]

Brooklyn obviously is against progressive taxation.

Nice evasion again. Thanks for conceding that your Republican red states are government dependent welfare queens.

You did not read my previous post. This canard of the Left is just that: a canard. Next time the US is invaded by another country, should the red state military bases only protect the red states? Also, you are against progressive taxation.

[old salt]

MDLF76:
Or would you rather look at rural southern MD where poverty is sky high?

Is that observation data driven, or based on the transient impact of the reduction in tobacco farming ?
SoMd (tri-county) was a high growth region due to BRAC consolidation at Pax River. Went from rural to exurbs.
NavAirSysCom (& contractors) moved from N VA to where the aircraft, runways & airspace are.
Stenny brought home the bacon for SoMd.

[MDlaxfan76]

MDLF76:
Or would you rather look at rural southern MD where poverty is sky high?

Is that observation data driven, or based on the transient impact of the reduction in tobacco farming ?
SoMd (tri-county) was a high growth region due to BRAC consolidation at Pax River. Went from rural to exurbs.
NavAirSysCom (& contractors) moved from N VA to where the aircraft, runways & airspace are.
Stenny brought home the bacon for SoMd.

Hey, I have family in southern Md, old roots.
Not disparaging the area, nor its potential for someone with means wanting to raise a family.

But yeah, some horrendous rural poverty too.

PB was taking a shot at West Baltimore, I stayed in MD, but I could have just as easily pointed to some towns in Florida's Panhandle, which I think may be where PB lives, in which poverty is through the roof, educational outcomes are miserable, obesity, diabetes, heart disease are rampant, and tons of folks are on the dole.

[Brooklyn]

You did not read my previous post. This canard of the Left is just that: a canard. Next time the US is invaded by another country, should the red state military bases only protect the red states? Also, you are against progressive taxation.

Last time USA was invaded was about 80 years ago. I don't believe either of us will be around to see the next invasion should it ever occur.

Keep trying.

[a fan]

So, what do your 'Florida friends' find burdensome about Florida business law and regulations? I'd be curious to hear. Transaction taxes are high relative to other states, but we also don't have an income tax. Local regulations imo are low relative to other states where we have operations (soon Colorado!).

Most of my friends and certainly all of my peers are business owners; the mood for now is quite content and has been for some time. What lines of business are your 'Florida friends' in? Liquor manufacture?

Hospitality. One of Florida's largest employers. Know any restaurant owners? Ask them how many approvals and red tape did they need to
get their C of O. How many horse*hit delays do they have to deal with to get the doors open. Ask them how ridiculously expensive their liquor licenses are....unneeded barrier to entry, especially considering liquor sales are taxed again.

Ask them if their beer tax is four times higher than Colorado's. (psst, it is)

Ask them if they need a permit for the privilege of having outdoor seating. How much does it cost? How long does it take? Do they have to get input from locals if they want one.

Ask brewpub owners if they can sell their beer to distributors. (they can't). Or all the restrictions that keep maintain the FLA wholesaler monopoly, favored donors in Florida politics.

Ask a distiller like me if there's a pointless annual registration fee for every single SKU they sell in your State. (there is)

And that's just off the top of my head. So to my point....you're full of it. There is ZERO difference between R's and D's when it comes to red tape and regulation.

[old salt]

MDLF76:
Or would you rather look at rural southern MD where poverty is sky high?

Is that observation data driven, or based on the transient impact of the reduction in tobacco farming ?
SoMd (tri-county) was a high growth region due to BRAC consolidation at Pax River. Went from rural to exurbs.
NavAirSysCom (& contractors) moved from N VA to where the aircraft, runways & airspace are.
Stenny brought home the bacon for SoMd.

Hey, I have family in southern Md, old roots.
Not disparaging the area, nor its potential for someone with means wanting to raise a family.

But yeah, some horrendous rural poverty too.

PB was taking a shot at West Baltimore, I stayed in MD, but I could have just as easily pointed to some towns in Florida's Panhandle, which I think may be where PB lives, in which poverty is through the roof, educational outcomes are miserable, obesity, diabetes, heart disease are rampant, and tons of folks are on the dole.

Also lots of job opportunities in SoMd's service sector. It's a sprawling, affluent, exurb.
Excellent public schools, as well, for the entire community.
Hardly a viable comparison to W B'more. You can find po foks anywhere, in anecdotal amounts.
Where would you rather be a social worker or public school teacher ?
We moved "up the road" from SoMd because it was becoming too crowded, with the prosperity driven growth,
but we still operate a charity/business there.