An official report finds tax cuts for rich don't boost growth. Something that here has been told by many, because these cuts don't mean that will be inverted in creation of jobs, more Research and Development or any other things that help to the growth. That is the reality. And also is proven that during the Keynesian economics application was when USA had the biggest growth, even when corporations had much more taxes. Also it is a proof that outsourcing does not help to the economic growth, it goes against(other great believe of the Anti-workers of the Republican Party and Libertarian Party) Source: http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/02/pres...-finding-tax-cuts-for-rich-dont-boost-growth/ The report In the New York Times
The traditional cop-out of the GOP and its sheep. Attack the source when you can't change the facts. This passes, in some circles, for thought. The fact that "trickle-down" economics is a racket has been known and repeatedly demonstrated by multiple sources, not all of them "liberal," for years is another of those "inconvenient truths" they ignore. Among republicans, "passing for thought" and passing gas are easily confused. Of course, republicans are also easily confused.
Feel free to show us those unbiased sources lol. I'll give you a few minutes to try and find some. In the meantime you can read this: http://www.inquisitr.com/313855/new-york-times-editor-throws-paper-under-bus-for-liberal-bias/
What your suggesting is that Government can create jobs or improve an economy over that of the private sector. Since all revenues for the US Government comes from the people, in some manner, how can taking wealth from those people, generate creation of jobs or leave more wealth to improve an economy. I'll discuss this with YOU, not your source, but need the above answered to even understand your position. Also every Keynesian attempt or comparable system to GENERATE an economy has failed since humans learned to reason.
I am telling that reduce taxes does not generate any growth. And yes, I am saying that the only way to generate growth is to directly invest in the sources of growth, it is in the means of productions, in R&D... and many of that things are done by government, for example it is a fact that the URSS grew a lot, also USA has a lot of their improvements thanks to public investments, for example the ones done in the NASA or the Pentagon. And yes, private sector many times does not work as it should and also there is the fact that reduce the taxes to richs only makes them richer and they don't invest that. That is the fact. The only way to generate to growth in economy is giving money to the economy and not having it stopped, as it has been done by many rich people without investing. This money of taxes go to be used for everybody, at least in theory and more in a democratic country that would be more real.
so your saying if Romney wins he will not create 22 million new jobs? maybe he isn't lying, maybe he will just hire and fire people all day, he did say he loves to fire people .
Fine...let me blow up this thread for you and put you out of your misery. U.S. agency withdraws tax report challenging Republican ideas http://news.yahoo.com/u-agency-withdraws-tax-report-challenging-republican-ideas-215057131.html So this wonderful report you linked to has been withdrawn by the agency that created it because it is flawed. LOL Like I said, don't trust unbiased sources.
Is it flawed because this report goes against the thesis of th Republican Party? And they can't say why is it wrong or flawed? Give me arguments to say that the information given by the report is flawed. Not just say that it is flawed. Say me the points that are flawed and why.
republicans shot it down, they are on the committee, no report would be good enough for them, unless it was titled "trickle down economics works" .
So your contending that the CRS is not an unbiased agency then? If that is true then we can't believe anything they put out, right?
if you read the article youll see the crs stood by its findings and their economic advisers told them not to pull it because it was correct, but republicans pressured them to pull it so they did
Since I don't feel like re-inventing the wheel or doing your work for you, start with The Economist, October 27th, 2012, Page 12,, "A deficit of common sense, The debate about budget cuts has become dangerously theological." Also, Page 76, "No short cuts, Short Term Austerity in the aftermath of a severe crisis may prove more painful than thought." Current enough for you? I hardly think The Economist is a LIBERAL SOURCE. There are more, but you can do your own work.
