Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party

[Kelly]

Ok...so you guys shot down my idea of a test for voters....WHAT ABOUT, a test for candidates?

I can make a test up for them that is unbiased and void of any partisanship....I do it for a living.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Congress doesn't even want to take a pee/drug test.

I doubt they'll agree to an aptitude test.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I'd be all for mandatory drug testing of congress. Or really, any government official.

 

[The Overlord]

Does the common GOP tactic of having tax cuts for the rich really promote economic growth? Because it doesn't seem to be working in Kansas:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...nor-implements-gop-economics-disaster-ensues/

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Did trickle down economics ever work?

 

[Pink Ranger]

Did trickle down economics ever work?

It works for the trickler.

 

[summerteeth]

Did trickle down economics ever work?

I don't know their unemployment has dropped from last year and they have a 4.9 Unemployment rate, well below national average. Growth is probably lower than most because other states are still recovering. That above article really didn't provide much information.

 

[Schlosser85]

I don't think it was ever really intended to work.

 

[wiegeabo]

It works for the trickler.

*wait's for the announcement of Marvel's new mutant in 3...2...1...*

 

[The Overlord]

I don't know their unemployment has dropped from last year and they have a 4.9 Unemployment rate, well below national average. Growth is probably lower than most because other states are still recovering. That above article really didn't provide much information.

Actually I found another article that says that job growth has been pretty bad under Brownback in Kansas:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...in-kansas-have-cost-the-state-money-and-jobs/

Also Kansas had a surplus before Brownback became governor and now it has a deficit. Moody is apparently going to downgrade Kansas' credit rating and Brownback is both unpopular with the general public and members of his own party. When is this growth supposed to kick in? Brownback introduced these tax cuts back in 2012, its been almost 2 years.

I think we have to realize this idea that "cutting taxes on the rich will encourage growth and magically fix all our economic problems" is a naive fairy tale and Kansas is the proof.

If you want to avoid deficits, you would have to raise taxes and cut spending, there are no easy answers and you have to be careful what you cut. People still want functional roads and schools.

Lower class tax cuts might encourage some growth, but nowadays people may be more likely to simply save their money rather then spend it in these uncertain times, thus not creating much growth. Tax cuts for the rich will create jobs for bankers in the Cook Islands, more then anything one else.

 

[SV Fan]

I don't know their unemployment has dropped from last year and they have a 4.9 Unemployment rate, well below national average. Growth is probably lower than most because other states are still recovering. That above article really didn't provide much information.

To put things in perspective

Unemployment Jan 2011 when he got in office

US - 8.9% KS - 6.8%

Jan 2012

US - 8.3% KS - 5.9%

Jan 2013

US - 7.7% KS - 5.6%

June 2014

US - 6.3% KS - 4.9%

In general they say your policies/budgets really don't start kicking in till 6 month to a year after you get in office so how much of the first year decrease in unemployment can be questioned. After that first year you get roughly 1% drop in employment

All that being said giving him credit the second he came in officer the US unemployment dropped by almost 29%, while KS unemployment dropped about 27%. Those numbers are fairly close and you could say since KS had a lower unemployment rate the 2% less is not really a big difference because there was much less people they needed to get back to work

If you look at it what happened after his budget kicked in in 2012 US unemployment dropped 24% while Kansas only dropped 17%. While I think a state like Kansas deserves some leeway because it has better numbers then the average, 7% might be a wee bit to much leeway to give them.

I think though whether you view his influence starting Jan 2011 or Jan 2012 you can basically say KS has performed roughly a little worse then the US national average for gaining jobs.

It should also be added in terms of "tax cuts" he added 1% to the state tax which is costing many middle and lower class people more money then the so called tax breaks.

 

[summerteeth]

To put things in perspective

Unemployment Jan 2011 when he got in office

US - 8.9% KS - 6.8%

Jan 2012

US - 8.3% KS - 5.9%

Jan 2013

US - 7.7% KS - 5.6%

June 2014

US - 6.3% KS - 4.9%

In general they say your policies/budgets really don't start kicking in till 6 month to a year after you get in office so how much of the first year decrease in unemployment can be questioned. After that first year you get roughly 1% drop in employment

All that being said giving him credit the second he came in officer the US unemployment dropped by almost 29%, while KS unemployment dropped about 27%. Those numbers are fairly close and you could say since KS had a lower unemployment rate the 2% less is not really a big difference because there was much less people they needed to get back to work

If you look at it what happened after his budget kicked in in 2012 US unemployment dropped 24% while Kansas only dropped 17%. While I think a state like Kansas deserves some leeway because it has better numbers then the average, 7% might be a wee bit to much leeway to give them.

I think though whether you view his influence starting Jan 2011 or Jan 2012 you can basically say KS has performed roughly a little worse then the US national average for gaining jobs.

It should also be added in terms of "tax cuts" he added 1% to the state tax which is costing many middle and lower class people more money then the so called tax breaks.

Kansas is hovering around full employment at 4.9%. It doesn't leave room to really drop much from there. So yes, when you are close to full employment 7% isn't really too much leeway at all. Kansas is where the rest of the nation should be.

 

[SV Fan]

Kansas is hovering around full employment at 4.9%. It doesn't leave room to really drop much from there. So yes, when you are close to full employment 7% isn't really too much leeway at all. Kansas is where the rest of the nation should be.

That being said it's not like it started at the same point as the rest of the country. As I pointed out you could give credit to Brownbacks policies starting in 2012(when his budget takes effect) and in that case while it dropped the drop wasn't any different then the drop in other places.

Taking credit that you took a better then average unemployment rate and it's now better then average is not really a big accomplishment. It's sort of the equivalence if I went into a baseball game in the bottom of the ninth up by a few runs and threw a couple pitches and got a guy to hit a pop fly for an out, do I claim that I was key to the teams victory?

 

[Kelly]

Whoever did it, good for Kansas....4.7% is considered full employment.

I sat through a 3 hour lecture at the Federal Reserve in Houston, and that is what I remembered...lol

 

[summerteeth]

That being said it's not like it started at the same point as the rest of the country. As I pointed out you could give credit to Brownbacks policies starting in 2012(when his budget takes effect) and in that case while it dropped the drop wasn't any different then the drop in other places.

Taking credit that you took a better then average unemployment rate and it's now better then average is not really a big accomplishment. It's sort of the equivalence if I went into a baseball game in the bottom of the ninth up by a few runs and threw a couple pitches and got a guy to hit a pop fly for an out, do I claim that I was key to the teams victory?

Either way, he passed his budget and they proceeded to reach (within margin of error) full employment. The fact that Brownback is receiving criticism is pretty ridiculous.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

It's kind of like Rick Scott here in FL trying to take credit for jobs that were already predicted to happen any way. His policies had no effect on the outcome

 

[The Overlord]

Either way, he passed his budget and they proceeded to reach (within margin of error) full employment. The fact that Brownback is receiving criticism is pretty ridiculous.

So is the majority of the people of Kansas and 100 members of his own party being "ridiculous" by opposing him? If his plan is so great, why is it generating opposition from so many different people?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/100-kansas-gop-endorse-democrat-governor-24572423

You also ignored the article that said Kansas is lagging behind other states in terms of job creation, but let me post another article, that debunks or at least contextualizes many of the claims Brownback has made:

http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article673701.html

Can we say that after the Kansas surplus has drastically shrunk under Brownback, instead of growing, that the idea that upper tax cuts "pay for themselves" is likely incorrect? The growth in Kansas has not materialized and did not make up for the money that Brownback spent on these tax cuts, so he is failing to balance the books. This is basic accounting, assuming tax cuts pay for themselves seems to have been proven false by Kansas' increasing deficit. Tax cuts cost the government, so if you want a government to have balanced books, you have to take that in to account, rather then assuming tax cuts pay for themselves, which seems to be pure folly.

 

[summerteeth]

So is the majority of the people of Kansas and 100 members of his own party being "ridiculous" by opposing him? If his plan is so great, why is it generating opposition from so many different people?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/100-kansas-gop-endorse-democrat-governor-24572423

You also ignored the article that said Kansas is lagging behind other states in terms of job creation, but let me post another article, that debunks or at least contextualizes many of the claims Brownback has made:

I didn't ignore it. It's the same reason why it's lagging in drop in unemployment rate. When you are at full employment, you will not be creating as many jobs as a place that is in recovery and has a high unemployment rate. Just take a look at the countries that are creating more jobs than anyone else. And yes, those people are being ridiculous, to have full employment in this economy is a great accomplishment.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/14/be...ng-leadership-careers-employment_slide_2.html

 

[The Overlord]

I didn't ignore it. It's the same reason why it's lagging in drop in unemployment rate. When you are at full employment, you will not be creating as many jobs as a place that is in recovery and has a high unemployment rate. Just take a look at the countries that are creating more jobs than anyone else. And yes, those people are being ridiculous, to have full employment in this economy is a great accomplishment.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/14/be...ng-leadership-careers-employment_slide_2.html

So then why are 100 members of his own party and most of the general public of Kansas opposed to him?

Plus is turning a surplus into a deficit and having Kansas credit rating downgraded by Moody's a great accomplishment?

http://www.kansas.com/2014/05/01/3434066/moodys-downgrades-kansas-credit.html

It seems like you are ignoring the negatives in regards to Brownback's handling of the economy. If tax cuts are supposed to pay for themselves, then why is Brownback failing to balance Kansas' books?

Also what kind of jobs did Brownback create? This isn't like what Rick Perry, where Rick Perry said he was a job creator and most of the jobs he created were at Burger King, is it?

 

[summerteeth]

So then why are 100 members of his own party and most of the general public of Kansas opposed to him?

Plus is turning a surplus into a deficit and having Kansas credit rating downgraded by Moody's a great accomplishment?

http://www.kansas.com/2014/05/01/3434066/moodys-downgrades-kansas-credit.html

It seems like you are ignoring the negatives in regards to Brownback's handling of the economy. If tax cuts are supposed to pay for themselves, then why is Brownback failing to balance Kansas' books?

Also what kind of jobs did Brownback create? This isn't like what Rick Perry, where Rick Perry said he was a job creator and most of the jobs he created were at Burger King, is it?

I'm not ignoring anything, but there's not really a story in my mind as long as you are at full employment. If they make spending cuts to balance the budget and that causes a significant rise in unemployment then yes, he deserves the criticism. As far as the 100 people that oppose him in his own party, well that's politics. I don't know what their motivations are, maybe they feel like they are losing influence in a very conservative government. Moody says this is why they gave the credit rating. It's not even that they are predicting disaster, they are just not sure.

“We do not view the lack of a state income tax, in and of itself, as a credit weakness,” the report said. “However, eliminating a tax that has been in place for many years and has accounted for a large share of revenue entails risks.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2014/05/01/3434066/moodys-downgrades-kansas-credit.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Persistence]

Democrats are complaining that jobs aren't growing fast enough under a full employment governor now? I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Business income tax is their bread and butter.

 

[The Overlord]

Democrats are complaining that jobs aren't growing fast enough under a full employment governor now? I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Business income tax is their bread and butter.

First who says I am a Democrat?

Second, If you had a Democrat governor who shrunk a surplus from the previous government and had its credit status downgraded by Moody's, you would have Republicans crying bloody murder, why is it okay for a Republican governor do this?

This seems like a pattern, Republicans in opposition complain about government spending and when they get into power, they have no problem spending money on their pet projects, like the military industrial complex. How did Reagan or either of the Bush Presidents reduce the debt?

Republicans complain about tax and spend liberals, but their plan seems to spend and create more debt, how is that better?

I'm not ignoring anything, but there's not really a story in my mind as long as you are at full employment. If they make spending cuts to balance the budget and that causes a significant rise in unemployment then yes, he deserves the criticism. As far as the 100 people that oppose him in his own party, well that's politics. I don't know what their motivations are, maybe they feel like they are losing influence in a very conservative government. Moody says this is why they gave the credit rating. It's not even that they are predicting disaster, they are just not sure.

“We do not view the lack of a state income tax, in and of itself, as a credit weakness,” the report said. “However, eliminating a tax that has been in place for many years and has accounted for a large share of revenue entails risks.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2014/05/01/3434066/moodys-downgrades-kansas-credit.html#storylink=cpy

We both know that unemployment numbers are always somewhat misleading, mainly because they only factor in people who are actively working for and not the people who have given up looking for work. The real numbers are always bigger then what the stats say and the sluggish job growth could easily spell trouble in the near future. Also what is the character of these jobs in Kansas, are they career jobs or just minimum wage service jobs?

You still have not addressed the fact that Brownback has shrunk the surplus in Kansas and the fact he is becoming unpopular with the general public Kansas. If the GOP complain about government debt so often, why is it okay for a GOP governor to lose a surplus? By law Brownback has to balance the books, so how is going to do that without massive cuts that could cause greater unemployment?

Also 100 members of your own party turning against you, is not politics as usual. That seems rare in politics, not a usual occurrence, you cannot shrug that off as politics

If Brownback's policies are so great, he would be more popular with the general public, 100 members of his own party would not be turning against him and Kansas' credit rating would not be downgraded. Yes you can 100 members turning against him had much to do with Kansas getting downgraded, but the Moody report doesn't site that as the only reason for the downgrade, its a factor, but not the only one, the report clearly outlines all the factors on detail. Again I think 100 Republicans turning against him deserves more exploration, rather then just shrugging and saying "that's politics".

Either there is a giant conspiracy to discredit Brownback or there is something wrong with his policies that, I believe the later. If it was just democrats complaining about him, I would dismiss that as mere partisanship, but all this stuff happening we are seeing happening at once, you can't explain that away so easily.

 

[summerteeth]

First who says I am a Democrat?

Second, If you had a Democrat governor who shrunk a surplus from the previous government and had its credit status downgraded by Moody's, you would have Republicans crying bloody murder, why is it okay for a Republican governor do this?

This seems like a pattern, Republicans in opposition complain about government spending and when they get into power, they have no problem spending money on their pet projects, like the military industrial complex. How did Reagan or either of the Bush Presidents reduce the debt?

Republicans complain about tax and spend liberals, but their plan seems to spend and create more debt, how is that better?



We both know that unemployment numbers are always somewhat misleading, mainly because they only factor in people who are actively working for and not the people who have given up looking for work. The real numbers are always bigger then what the stats say and the sluggish job growth could easily spell trouble in the near future. Also what is the character of these jobs in Kansas, are they career jobs or just minimum wage service jobs?

You still have not addressed the fact that Brownback has shrunk the surplus in Kansas and the fact he is becoming unpopular with the general public Kansas. If the GOP complain about government debt so often, why is it okay for a GOP governor to lose a surplus? By law Brownback has to balance the books, so how is going to do that without massive cuts that could cause greater unemployment?

Losing a surplus and debt are two different things.

 

[The Overlord]

Losing a surplus and debt are two different things.

I know that, but Brownback's economic plan is creating a deficit, which will lead massive debt, if Brownback doesn't change his plan. By Kansas law the government has to balanced its books and since the growth that was supposed to be created by tax cuts did not materialize, exactly how will he balance the budget?

Its not very fiscally conservative to create a deficit, especially when Brownback had a surplus from the previous government.

I think you are missing the big problem I have with this situation, I'm taking issue with the idea that tax cuts will always promote growth and will always pay for themselves. If a politician wants to cut taxes, fine, all I am saying that there should be no assumption the tax cuts will pay for themselves, I am saying that if that politician wants cut taxes, they should make up revenue somewhere else, right away.

Give people a clear choice, the government can cut taxes, but you may lose a government service or it might be reduced. Choose one or the other, don't tell them this fantasy that a tax cut will always pay for itself, there should be a price for it. That is the way the real world works, everything has a real cost. Tax cuts can create deficits just as easily as other government spending.

 

[summerteeth]

I know that, but Brownback's economic plan is creating a deficit, which will lead massive debt, if Brownback doesn't change his plan. By Kansas law the government has to balanced its books and since the growth that was supposed to be created by tax cuts did not materialize, exactly how will he balance the budget?

...No it will not lead to massive debt, they will just cut spending. Like you said Kansas like every state but one has to balance the budget. We will see what happens. Republicans generally don't like government spending, granted most of us have our limits when it comes to how much should be cut and maybe Brownback will go too far in that regard. We don't really know yet, but you trying to equate this to Republicans' view on the National debt just doesn't really work.

The tax cuts still could pay for themselves, businesses don't just don't pick up and move it is usually a long and detailed process. These tax cuts will probably make Kansas more attractive in the future. Again, we will see how this plays out, but the way the media is going after this guy when he has a 4.9% unemployment rate after passing the budget is something I do not understand. He hasn't done any damage to the unemployment rate by massive tax cuts. Maybe he will in the future, I really can't say. Not even Moody was sure.