[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Debt is not inherently a bad thing; although, most forms of debt are ill advised.
The real discussion, as it pertains to the national debt, should be centered on how much debt is too much. [/quote]
No, this is completely false. Dept is bad. It is always bad. The argument is if you can take actions that involve accruing debt and have the total outcome be positive. [/quote]
Debt is not always bad. Who taught you this?
[/quote]
Name a situation where adding just debt to it makes it better.[/quote]
I don’t really wanna go down this road again today, but better / worse =/= good / bad. You’re making the mistake, imo, of conflating these two very different things. [/quote]
I’ll take that as an “I can’t”. And I think it’s you guys who are confusing the evaluation of something with the evaluation of its use as a means to an end.[/quote]
Lol, whatever… I’ve already addressed this fallacy.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Debt is not inherently a bad thing; although, most forms of debt are ill advised.
The real discussion, as it pertains to the national debt, should be centered on how much debt is too much. [/quote]
No, this is completely false. Dept is bad. It is always bad. The argument is if you can take actions that involve accruing debt and have the total outcome be positive. [/quote]
Debt is not always bad. Who taught you this?
[/quote]
Name a situation where adding just debt to it makes it better.[/quote]
If one can make more money than the amount borrowed(debt), that is good.
If one can make more money than the amount borrowed(debt), that is good.
[/quote]
You evaluated multiple things. I asked you to control other variables. Without the confounding variables: Making X dollars is better than making X dollars and going in debt. The debt is a negative.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Debt is not inherently a bad thing; although, most forms of debt are ill advised.
The real discussion, as it pertains to the national debt, should be centered on how much debt is too much. [/quote]
No, this is completely false. Dept is bad. It is always bad. The argument is if you can take actions that involve accruing debt and have the total outcome be positive. [/quote]
Debt is not always bad. Who taught you this?
[/quote]
Name a situation where adding just debt to it makes it better.[/quote]
If one can make more money than the amount borrowed(debt), that is good.
[/quote]
Debt is risk. Debt is negative. The borrower makes a decision to assume debt with the notion that the reward will offset the risk taken. Sure its a means to an end, but it goes right back to my initial analogy. Are you more likely to buy a car if you have no money, or $30,000 in savings? Which implies more risk, debt or savings?
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
We don’t have a budget problem, we have a revenue problem.
Balancing the budget causes loss in GDP.
Since there is evidence to prove this as shown by the professor why don’t people believe the evidence but instead hold on to their ideology?[/quote]
How much extra money will you donate to the federal government to fix the revenue problem? Every little bit extra you can give will help. After all if it is a revenue problem your extra revenue could be part of the solution.
Why wait for the government to mandate it when you can do it out of the goodness of your heart?
Thank you for your patriotic contribution. You could even consider working more hours to increase your contribution to ridding us of the revenue problem. You could try getting rid of Netflix, cutting down on fast food, etc. This will help you have more money to donate to the revenue problem. [/quote]
Or we could have the corporations pay the taxes that they owe.[/quote]
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you? If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem.
[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
We don’t have a budget problem, we have a revenue problem.
Balancing the budget causes loss in GDP.
Since there is evidence to prove this as shown by the professor why don’t people believe the evidence but instead hold on to their ideology?[/quote]
How much extra money will you donate to the federal government to fix the revenue problem? Every little bit extra you can give will help. After all if it is a revenue problem your extra revenue could be part of the solution.
Why wait for the government to mandate it when you can do it out of the goodness of your heart?
Thank you for your patriotic contribution. You could even consider working more hours to increase your contribution to ridding us of the revenue problem. You could try getting rid of Netflix, cutting down on fast food, etc. This will help you have more money to donate to the revenue problem. [/quote]
Or we could have the corporations pay the taxes that they owe.[/quote]
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you? If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem. [/quote]
Lets also just ignore the fact that American has the highest corporate tax rate in the world…
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Myth: Debt is a tool and should be used to help create prosperity.
Truth: Debt isn’t used by wealthy people nearly as much as we are led to believe.
-Dave Ramsey
More people wouldn’t need debt to by a house if fewer people used debt. It is possible to buy a house for an average guy without debt. But this is besides the point of my argument.[/quote]
Dave Ramsey is to Finance what Slim Fast is to Fat People: Something quick, nutritious, prepackaged and hard to fuck up.
[/quote]
Dave Ramsey has some good advice but gets a LOT wrong. You can cost yourself a good deal of money following his advice for reducing debt. I have some other qualms with him as well. I save over 500 dollars a year using credit cards.
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you? If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem. [/quote]
He’s a communist. Since when do they not want other people to do all the heavy lifting in life? lol
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you? If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem. [/quote]
He’s a communist. Since when do they not want other people to do all the heavy lifting in life? lol
[/quote]
I look forward to hearing how much more Zepp gave.
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you? If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem. [/quote]
He’s a communist. Since when do they not want other people to do all the heavy lifting in life? lol
[/quote]
I look forward to hearing how much more Zepp gave. [/quote]
Seattle CEO lowers his pay to $70k/year so he can pay all of his employees $70k/year.
“You might be making $35,000 a year right now but everyone in here will definitely be making $70,000 a year and I’m super excited about that,” Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments, in Ballard, told his employees during a recent gathering.
The announcement caught everyone off-guard. Could it be true? $70,000 is the new minimum wage in this office?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Seattle CEO lowers his pay to $70k/year so he can pay all of his employees $70k/year.
“You might be making $35,000 a year right now but everyone in here will definitely be making $70,000 a year and I’m super excited about that,” Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments, in Ballard, told his employees during a recent gathering.
The announcement caught everyone off-guard. Could it be true? $70,000 is the new minimum wage in this office?
Should be interesting to see how this pans out. [/quote]
With the “progressive” tax system, they may end up with the same net income anyway.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Seattle CEO lowers his pay to $70k/year so he can pay all of his employees $70k/year.
“You might be making $35,000 a year right now but everyone in here will definitely be making $70,000 a year and I’m super excited about that,” Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments, in Ballard, told his employees during a recent gathering.
The announcement caught everyone off-guard. Could it be true? $70,000 is the new minimum wage in this office?
Should be interesting to see how this pans out. [/quote]
With the “progressive” tax system, they may end up with the same net income anyway.[/quote]
So we have a revenue problem and you aren’t doing ANYTHING to help it? You’re just saying someone else should fix it but not you?
Am I the whole nation?
If you honestly believe we have a revenue problem why are you personally not doing anything to be part of the solution? Why not be part of the solution by donating some of your money to the cause instead of saying someone else should do it?
How do you know I’m not?
Maybe if you start the movement of paying more it will catch on. I find it telling that you have no intention of being part of the solution to what you say is a problem.
Yeah because corporations and ultra-rich people usually have the best intentions for the country and are not selfish and greedy.
