Ryan Strome Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 5 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: Well, I'm hardly an expert, but I work with several and FWIW, they don't believe in Supply Side either. This blurb from Wiki spells it out better than I can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics Many early proponents argued that the size of the economic growth would be significant enough that the increased government revenue from a faster-growing economy would be sufficient to compensate completely for the short-term costs of a tax cut and that tax cuts could in fact cause overall revenue to increase.[13] Some hold this was borne out during the 1980s when advocates of supply-side economics claim tax cuts ultimately led to an overall increase in government revenue due to stronger economic growth. However, some economists dispute this assertion pointing to the fact that revenue as a percentage of GDP declined during Reagan's term in office.[19] The fact that tax receipts as a percentage of GDP fell following the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 shows a decrease in tax burden as share of GDP and a corresponding increase in the deficit because spending did not fall relative to GDP. Total tax revenue from income tax receipts increased during Reagan's two terms, with the exception of 1982–1983.[20] The Treasury Department also studied the Reagan tax cuts and concluded they significantly reduced tax revenues relative to a baseline without them.[21] Some contemporary economists do not consider supply-side economics a tenable economic theory, with Alan Blinder calling it an "ill-fated" and perhaps "silly" school on the pages of a 2006 textbook.[22]Greg Mankiw, former chairman of President President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, offered similarly sharp criticism of the school in the early editions of his introductory economics textbook.[23]Mankiw wrote in June 2017: Tax cuts rarely pay for themselves. My reading of the academic literature leads me to believe that about one-third of the cost of a typical tax cut is recouped with faster economic growth.[24] In a 1992 article for the Harvard International Review, James Tobin wrote: [The] idea that tax cuts would actually increase revenues turned out to deserve the ridicule [...][25] The extreme promises of supply-side economics did not materialize. President Reagan argued that because of the effect depicted in the Laffer curve, the government could maintain expenditures, cut tax rates, and balance the budget. This was not the case. Government revenues fell sharply from levels that would have been realized without the tax cuts. —Karl Case and Ray Fair, Principles of Economics (2007), p. 695[26] Supply side proponents Trabandt and Uhlig argue that "static scoring overestimates the revenue loss for labor and capital tax cuts" and that "dynamic scoring" is a better predictor for the effects of tax cuts.[27]To address these criticisms, in 2003 the Congressional Budget Office conducted a dynamic scoring analysis of tax cuts advocated by supply advocates. Two of the nine models used in the study predicted a large improvement in the deficit over the next ten years resulting from tax cuts and the other seven models did not.[28] I'm not talking about paying for themselves but they put people back to work. Trudeau's middle class tax break isn't paying for itself, infact it cost Canadians 1.2 billion dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedestroyerofworlds Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 1 minute ago, Ryan Strome said: I'm not talking about paying for themselves but they put people back to work. Trudeau's middle class tax break isn't paying for itself, infact it cost Canadians 1.2 billion dollars. And Harper's GST cuts cost way more. They weren't paid for either and still cost us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 Just now, Ryan Strome said: I'm not talking about paying for themselves but they put people back to work. Trudeau's middle class tax break isn't paying for itself, infact it cost Canadians 1.2 billion dollars. And Trump's tax break is expected to add a Trillion to the US debt....during a boom economy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 6 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said: And Harper's GST cuts cost way more. They weren't paid for either and still cost us It benefited every Canadian. See my answer below. 4 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: And Trump's tax break is expected to add a Trillion to the US debt....during a boom economy.... I completely agree but apparently outside of @Jimmy McGill and myself no one in north America cares about debt. Trudeau is running massive deficits and adding massive debt trump is doing the same and yet both countries have low unemployment levels not seen in 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 15 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: It benefited every Canadian. See my answer below. I completely agree but apparently outside of @Jimmy McGill and myself no one in north America cares about debt. Trudeau is running massive deficits and adding massive debt trump is doing the same and yet both countries have low unemployment levels not seen in 40 years. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 What could go wrong? https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/companies-could-be-allowed-to-release-treated-tailings-pond-water-into-athabasca-river-by-2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 1 minute ago, Warhippy said: What could go wrong? https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/companies-could-be-allowed-to-release-treated-tailings-pond-water-into-athabasca-river-by-2023 Welcome to beautiful Alberta tourism.... great fishing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 11 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: LOL Not sure why you're laughing you helped make my point. 4 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Welcome to beautiful Alberta tourism.... great fishing.... As BCers shouldn't you two be worried about tailings ponds in the Caribou? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Not sure why you're laughing you helped make my point. As BCers shouldn't you two be worried about tailings ponds in the Caribou? Your b buddy stephanie harpie says HELLO>>>>>>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 29 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Your b buddy stephanie harpie says HELLO>>>>>>> Are you high tonight? I never voted for Harper he screwed Alberta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: Are you high tonight? I never voted for Harper he screwed Alberta. Oh yah... i forgot you voted Liberal.... LMAO . Stromer the Liberal ..... sounds nice...... Edited February 2, 2020 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 6 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: It benefited every Canadian. See my answer below. I completely agree but apparently outside of @Jimmy McGill and myself no one in north America cares about debt. Trudeau is running massive deficits and adding massive debt trump is doing the same and yet both countries have low unemployment levels not seen in 40 years. Yet you just defended Trump's tax cut. So which is it? Is supply side good, even though it adds hugely to the national debt, or do you have a better example...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 @Ryan Strome, but but. Quote The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers is forecasting capital spending will rise by 8.4 per cent to $11.6 billion this year, citing the Alberta government’s corporate tax cut and the easing of oil production limits as catalysts. “It has been a tough five years, and Canada has not fared well at a time when global demand continues to rise,” CAPP chief executive Tim McMillan told Bloomberg News. “It has taken some hard work, especially at the provincial level, to change the global view and put Canada back in a position where it can start to attract appropriate levels of capital again.” Expenditures for the country’s oil and natural gas sector could increase more than five per cent to $37 billion, the forecast states. Outside the oilsands, spending is projected to rise about four per cent to $25.4 billion. The additional $2 billion in capital spending this year will create or sustain about 11,800 direct and indirect jobs across Canada, CAPP projected. About 8,100 of those jobs will be in Alberta, which has struggled with elevated unemployment since the 2014 price crash https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/canadian-energy-sector-to-boost-spending-after-six-year-slide-says-capp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 Can you support Wexit but still call yourself a proud Canadian? Just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Can you support Wexit but still call yourself a proud Canadian? Just curious I love you baby, but you have to change cause without me you'd be way worse and you need to be thankful for me or I'm leaving. But I love you. Edited February 2, 2020 by inane 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: @Ryan Strome, but but. https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/canadian-energy-sector-to-boost-spending-after-six-year-slide-says-capp Ya this whole notion that corporate tax cuts are bad is stupid, do people not want jobs? I'm not saying to do it for the sake of doing it but if times are rough you should do it. Companies bleeding money will just go somewhere else where they get a better deal just like you or me going to a store. If the argument has switched to them not being paid of then why don't they complain about JTs tax break that added 1.2 billion to the debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Ya this whole notion that corporate tax cuts are bad is stupid, do people not want jobs? I'm not saying to do it for the sake of doing it but if times are rough you should do it. Companies bleeding money will just go somewhere else where they get a better deal just like you or me going to a store. If the argument has switched to them not being paid of then why don't they complain about JTs tax break that added 1.2 billion to the debt? Bomber was a steady cash taker for decades. Billions of $'s gone. IMHO there is a solid portion of our economy that relies on government handouts. Perhaps if the country is dealing from financial strength it might make sense. Any suggestion that capital costs are not at all time lows is highly questionable. Lots of venture capital in the market place. Yet lots of people and companies ask for handouts. All of these decisions seem to be dealt with in isolation. Canada is in serious financial shape as is the rest of the world. BNN spends an hour discussing family debt when a poll suggests 50% of the citizens of this country are $200 away from bankruptcy. Small favors that they spent an hour as that was 100% more than they did trying to elevate the level of debate during the last election. The country stumbles along with no strategy to defend the nation. Economic dependence on the USA limits any independent action away from American influence. Canada cannot defend her borders. The USA, China and Russia are all establishing themselves in the Arctic. The USA and China exert huge pressure to keep Canada as a source of their raw material needs. Canada's industrial strategy of the '50's, AutoPact, has/is collapsing. Hundreds of billions of public $'s spent on it. NAFTA 2.0 was a capitulation to the USA. Trump has made it clear to the world that his first priority is to the USA. It is about time that Canadian politicians used the same resolve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 33 minutes ago, Boudrias said: Bomber was a steady cash taker for decades. Billions of $'s gone. IMHO there is a solid portion of our economy that relies on government handouts. Perhaps if the country is dealing from financial strength it might make sense. Any suggestion that capital costs are not at all time lows is highly questionable. Lots of venture capital in the market place. Yet lots of people and companies ask for handouts. All of these decisions seem to be dealt with in isolation. Canada is in serious financial shape as is the rest of the world. BNN spends an hour discussing family debt when a poll suggests 50% of the citizens of this country are $200 away from bankruptcy. Small favors that they spent an hour as that was 100% more than they did trying to elevate the level of debate during the last election. The country stumbles along with no strategy to defend the nation. Economic dependence on the USA limits any independent action away from American influence. Canada cannot defend her borders. The USA, China and Russia are all establishing themselves in the Arctic. The USA and China exert huge pressure to keep Canada as a source of their raw material needs. Canada's industrial strategy of the '50's, AutoPact, has/is collapsing. Hundreds of billions of public $'s spent on it. NAFTA 2.0 was a capitulation to the USA. Trump has made it clear to the world that his first priority is to the USA. It is about time that Canadian politicians used the same resolve. But if Alberta leaves, it's not their problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) Alberta / Albertans in 2020 Edited February 2, 2020 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 @Jimmy McGill were you in Alberta today? 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now