Support NeoGAF

[yanipheonu]

 

[Extollere]

Aren't they having a similar issue in Oklahoma too? I remember hearing that their 5 day school week got slashed to 4.

 

[Bellamin]

I'd be scared to see how a classroom looks like there, in terms of supplies, tech, etc.

Depends on where you go, which is the heart of the matter.

If you go to school districts in Johnson County (one of the wealthiest counties in the state), kids are given tablets, no more than 20 students in a classroom, and have access to an abundant amount of educational resources.

Go further west, however, and you have schools that use old books, have no music programs, and have had to end the school year early because they've run out of money. Geography shouldn't determine the level of quality education kids get.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

That Laffer Curve is going to kick in any minute now. Just give it time.

Any minute now. Blink and you'll miss it.

 

[watershed]

I wonder if it will make a difference though. The Washington State Supreme Court already ruled that the state has failed to adequately fund public education and ordered the state to set aside more money for education and then later declared that the state had not made adequate progress towards fully funding education and yet we are still facing a 74 million dollar short fall for next school year. The legislature can seemingly just not do its job with no legal consequences even after a Supreme Court ruling.

 

[darkace]

Education takes less than 20 years to pay dividends. It affects people currently in high school, so it pays dividends rather quickly. Tax cutting like crazy ensures that education is not funded, as well, so it is very much related.

Tax cuts have immediate positive effects. The full effects take time. Besides improved spending on education in advanced economies has a very weak causal relationship with outcomes. Efficiency is far more important than dollar amount.

And what you're saying is that it takes a long time for large companies to decide to move based on taxes... But by the time they make the decision to move Kansas's economy is shit and undesirable(It already is), not to mention that the education cuts makes the work force less desirable even in the short term(People won't want to move to Kansas and have their children go to shit schools) better yet in the long term.

Nobody said Kansas couldn't enact other taxes. Just less shit ones.

And "Efficient taxation" is just a buzzterm that doesn't mean anything.

That's where you're wrong, kiddo:

http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2015/working-paper-2015-01

But, please, show me the economists who think that Kansas is being run properly. There has to be at least one whacko out there.

Who said Kansas was being run properly?

Why do people still respond to darkace? He's one of those guys who took a microecon 101 class and treated everything he learned in it like irrefutable gospel, despite the fact that much of it doesn't even work in the real world where most people are not rational actors.

Economics is not a legitimate science and does not deserve to be treated and respected as one.

Hostility to economics is inversely proportional to understanding.

I'd recommend taking econ 101. Your comments on the economy are a train-wreck.

 

[Dineren]

I wonder if it will make a difference though. The Washington State Supreme Court already ruled that the state has failed to adequately fund public education and ordered the state to set aside more money for education and then later declared that the state had not made adequate progress towards fully funding education and yet we are still facing a 74 million dollar short fall for next school year. The legislature can seemingly just not do its job with no legal consequences even after a Supreme Court ruling.

Maybe not, but at least here in Kansas a lot of hardliners lost in primaries last election.Not enough ultimately to overturn the governor's veto, but enough that I'm at least a bit more confident that the tax cuts will eventually be reversed.

I'd like to imagine at least part of the cause of the primary losses is everyone constantly being reminded by these rulings that the legislature isn't properly funding schools.

 

[rokkerkory]

Don't worry guys it'll trickle down any decade now

 

[geestack]

brownback is term limited apparently; he will not be able to run for re-election next year.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Don't worry guys it'll trickle down any decade now

2 decades to be precise.

 

[Laevateinn]

Darkace must be convinced that if Kansas goes bankrupt Australia will be able to buy it. There's no way he makes sense otherwise.

 

[darkace]

Darkace must be convinced that if Kansas goes bankrupt Australia will be able to buy it. There's no way he makes sense otherwise.

Can you please just point out where I said Kansas is doing well? With citations, thanks.

I'm half convinced this place is educated in Kansas given the reading comprehension levels.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Darkace must be convinced that if Kansas goes bankrupt Australia will be able to buy it. There's no way he makes sense otherwise.

Goddammit, they've figured out our plan!

Can you please just point out where I said Kansas is doing well? With citations, thanks.

I'm half convinced this place is educated in Kansas given the reading comprehension levels.

So being Australian, I don't have a horse in this race. But I could have sworn I've seen you arguing that Kansas was fine in one of the previous Kansasnomics threads

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Kansas did re-elect this buffoon.

 

[darkace]

So being Australian, I don't have a horse in this race. But I could have sworn I've seen you arguing that Kansas was fine in one of the previous Kansasnomics threads

I said Kansas wasn't a dumpster fire like some were saying, and that Brownback's policies weren't 'trickle-down', which isn't a legitimate thing and never has been outside the dreams of lefties scared of wealthy people.

If I had a choice between Kansas and the dreams of people like Sanders, I'd choose Kansas. But it's definitely not my first choice area.

 

[digdug2k]

Tax cuts have immediate positive effects. The full effects take time. Besides improved spending on education in advanced economies has a very weak causal relationship with outcomes. Efficiency is far more important than dollar amount.

Kansas cut taxes to businesses, not people. I'm not really aware of any significant immediate positive effects it had.

 

[darkace]

Kansas cut taxes to businesses, not people. I'm not really aware of any significant immediate positive effects it had.

Businesses are people.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Businesses are people.

Businesses are comprised of people, they are not people no matter how the Courts have stated it.

Unfortunately, when businesses get tax cuts, they don't pass those savings onto their workforce in the form of increased wages. It doesn't happen in any meaningful way. The only way wages rise is if they are forced to rise.

Minimum wage hike is absolutely necessary.

 

[Apt101]

Hey let's implement a bunch of economic practices that are logically flawed and that every serious economist and financial advisor says is doomed to failure. It will all work out.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Businesses are people.

No, they are not. They are a legal entities representing the interests and intents of one or more persons. If you become a corporation or LLC, you are subject to additional taxes for the added personal liability protection they afford. That is the trade off.

I don't give a shit what any court ruling has said because it is wrong.

 

[XT Vengeance]

A shame that the future of those children gets compromised by this experiment

It isn't even an experiment. They would have to pay attention to the results if it were. If the Republicans did that they wouldn't do a quarter of the shit the do.

 

[darkace]

No, they are not. They are a legal entities representing the interests and intents of one or more persons. If you become a corporation or LLC, you are subject to additional taxes for the added personal liability protection they afford. That is the trade off.

For tax purposes, businesses are people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence

https://www.ukessays.com/essays/eco...ffective-incidence-of-tax-economics-essay.php

http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2015/working-paper-2015-01

Businesses are comprised of people, they are not people no matter how the Courts have stated it.

Unfortunately, when businesses get tax cuts, they don't pass those savings onto their workforce in the form of increased wages. It doesn't happen in any meaningful way. The only way wages rise is if they are forced to rise.

Wow this is just flat out wrong.

http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/faculty-res...s/direct-incidence-corporate-income-tax-wages

https://www.treasury.gov.au/~/media...loads/PDF/Treasury-Working-Paper-2016-02.ashx

http://www.treasury.gov.au/Publicat...e-1/The-incidence-of-company-tax-in-Australia

http://www.nber.org/data-appendix/w19757/CorporateTaxPaper.pdf

I wish lefties would understand the economy so they don't hurt those they're trying to help. People like Sanders are worse for individuals in the economy than Brownback.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I wish lefties would understand the economy so they don't hurt those they're trying to help. People like Sanders are worse for individuals in the economy than Brownback.

This is literally backward. Brownback's polices are designed to siphon money out of the poor and middle classes, which is exactly what we're seeing play out in Kansas. Sanders' were designed to reverse it.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

Good thing Devos is on the case.

Huehuehuehueh*sigh

 

[darkace]

This is literally backward. Brownback's polices are designed to siphon money out of the poor and middle classes, which is exactly what we're seeing play out in Kansas. Sanders' were designed to reverse it.

Can you just point to me the part of Brownbacks policies that are designed to siphon money from the poor and the middle classes?

And that doesn't change my statement, even if it is true. The progressive left would crash the US economy if allowed to implement their tax and regulatory dreams.

 

[TemplaerDude]

You are the poster version of that dumb "this is fine" comic.

 

[Oblivion]

I said Kansas wasn't a dumpster fire like some were saying, and that Brownback's policies weren't 'trickle-down', which isn't a legitimate thing and never has been outside the dreams of lefties scared of wealthy people.

Is this the "trickle-down economics doesn't exist because no Republican has ever used that specific phrase" argument?

 

[commedieu]

Is this the "trickle-down economics doesn't exist because no Republican has ever used that specific phrase" argument?

What's Australian for "yes"?

 

[Pantaghana]

Can you please just point out where I said Kansas is doing well? With citations, thanks.

I'm half convinced this place is educated in Kansas given the reading comprehension levels.

Thread months ago:

Kansas is actually doing quite well, I don't know why people are going all doom and gloom. The results of Brownbacks reforms are to move from taxing income to taxing consumption, which is good policy, although some of the measures aimed at businesses are pretty bad. These are also long-term measures whose outcomes won't become crystal clear for at least a decade, so much of the sky is falling talk doesn't have any factual basis.

What Kansas needs to do is cut spending, even with Brownbacks cuts spending growth is outperforming state averages. I'm actually kinda sad the ultra-cons are being kicked out. I'd like to see the end results of what they implement.

[EDIT]
Actually it was a few days short of a year, but the weird american dating system confused me.

[EDIT#2]
And on third inspection, it was actually 6 months ago because fuck the american dating system.

 

[Darryl M R]

I hope the voters of Kansas are outraged.

Thread months ago:

 

[Silver Arrows]

What's Australian for "yes"?

Bogan gibberish, apparently.

I don't know fuck all about economics, but even I know that trickle down economics, as the Republicans like to prescribe to, is utter bullshit. And yet we have somebody here caping for it so goddamn hard.

 

[Manmademan]

You are right, but the knee jerk reaction was initially to raise state income taxes higher. I can attest we will move across state lines if they do so. Already pay 10% sales tax in this county, and owed $200 bucks on our state taxes. The proposed increase would have had us owing 1300 more.

You could also simply reverse the tax cuts that did nothing but wreck the economy, there's that too

 

[VanMardigan]

Thread months ago:



[EDIT]
Actually it was a few days short of a year, but the weird american dating system confused me.

Boom

 

[Felix Lighter]

Thread months ago:



[EDIT]
Actually it was a few days short of a year, but the weird american dating system confused me.

Thanks for this. It's perfect.

 

[Manmademan]

Thread months ago:

BrutalSavageRekt.gif

 

[Carpe Carnim]

Originally Posted by darkace
Kansas is actually doing quite well, I don't know why people are going all doom and gloom. The results of Brownbacks reforms are to move from taxing income to taxing consumption, which is good policy, although some of the measures aimed at businesses are pretty bad. These are also long-term measures whose outcomes won't become crystal clear for at least a decade, so much of the sky is falling talk doesn't have any factual basis.

What Kansas needs to do is cut spending, even with Brownbacks cuts spending growth is outperforming state averages. I'm actually kinda sad the ultra-cons are being kicked out. I'd like to see the end results of what they implement.

Man, it has to be embarrassing for you that your ill-conceived Hot Takes are only a search bar away, huh? Sad!

On topic: the few Kansans I know have taken to traveling to CO once a month to do their shopping because of the sales tax increases instituted through Brownback's Trickle Down policies. They're just biding their time until they get new teaching offers in less idiotically run states.

 

[darkace]

Thread months ago:

*relative to what people were saying. I even clarified that a few posts down.

 

[Saganator]

Sucks that normal Kansas people had to suffer, but on the bright side this is a great example of extreme tax cutting economic policy not working. Democrats need to make sure as many people as possible are aware of the failed tax cutting experiment in Kansas and the effect it had on lower and middle class people.

 

[Silver Arrows]

*relative to what people were saying. I even clarified that a few posts down.

nice save! Reflexes like Lundqvist.

Again, answer this:

How do you feel about Brownback's economic policies basically stunting children's formative years due to inadequate funding in specific areas? Or is that just a small drawback to trickle down economics, something that will be changed in, your words, 'two decades from now'?

Sure is a lot of talk from somebody so far away from the scene of the crime. Guess what? I have good friends from Kansas that agree with everybody else except you in this thread: that Brownback's economic policies are asinine at best, and killing Kansas at worst.

 

[shem935]

*relative to what people were saying. I even clarified that a few posts down.

You're so full of shit lol

 

[thehypocrite]

*relative to what people were saying. I even clarified that a few posts down.

You even added another decade, 😂😂😂. Also why do you claim consumption tax aren't siphoning money from the low and middle class to the top when they are regressive in nature? That doesn't add up.

 

[darkace]

nice save! Reflexes like Lundqvist.

Thanks. There was a reason I was first slip. And the doctor did always say my reflexes were phenomenal.

How do you feel about Brownback's economic policies basically stunting children's formative years due to inadequate funding in specific areas?

Unlikely his policies will do that. Education funding in developed countries has a very weak causal link with outcomes. Efficiency is far more important. Have to see studies before anyone knows either way.

The left needs to get over its obsession with how policies look and get into the nitty-gritty of the outcomes. Like when they halved healthcare spending in Oregon and outcomes remained the same.

Or is that just a small drawback to trickle down economics, something that will be changed in, your words, 'two decades from now'?

Is not understanding words a phenomenon localised entirely on this site? I don't remember ever having this sort of difficulty with people understanding what I'm writing or saying outside of it. I've been very clear about how tax cuts work (hint: it isn't an explosion of activity after two decades), so the fact you can't read them makes me wonder what's going on.

I just get the feeling that people here don't try and read what people say, they just pigeonhole based on a few key trigger words.

Sure is a lot of talk from somebody so far away from the scene of the crime. Guess what? I have good friends from Kansas that agree with everybody else except you in this thread: that Brownback's economic policies are asinine at best, and killing Kansas at worst.

People tend to congregate with those who share their political beliefs. News at 11. If so many people agreed with them he wouldn't be getting re-elected.

You even added another decade, ������. Also why do you claim consumption tax aren't siphoning money from the low and middle class to the top when they are regressive in nature? That doesn't add up.

'A few' and two are interchangeable. Bad writing habit I've had since childhood. Also consumption taxes aren't regressive on consumption. They're neither regressive nor progressive.

 

[Silver Arrows]

Thanks. There was a reason I was first slip. And the doctor did always say my reflexes were phenomenal.



Unlikely his policies will do that. Education funding in developed countries has a very weak causal link with outcomes. Efficiency is far more important. Have to see studies before anyone knows either way.

The left needs to get over its obsession with how policies look and get into the nitty-gritty of the outcomes. Like when they halved healthcare spending in Oregon and outcomes remained the same.



Is not understanding words a phenomenon localised entirely on this site? I don't remember ever having this sort of difficulty with people understanding what I'm writing or saying outside of it. I've been very clear about how tax cuts work (hint: it isn't an explosion of activity after two decades), so the fact you can't read them makes me wonder what's going on.

I just get the feeling that people here don't try and read what people say, they just pigeonhole based on a few key trigger words.



People tend to congregate with those who share their political beliefs. News at 11. If so many people agreed with him he wouldn't be getting re-elected.



'A few' and two are interchangeable. Bad writing habit I've had since childhood. Also consumption taxes aren't regressive. They're neither regressive nor progressive.

Masterful spin, but I've learned my lesson. Time to head out.

Enjoy supporting shitty economics and racist governments from your gilded castle in the Outback!

 

[thehypocrite]

'A few' and two are interchangeable. Bad writing habit I've had since childhood. Also consumption taxes aren't regressive. They're neither regressive nor progressive.

You said "A decade" not a few. Regardless, that's just untrue. They are regressive as they set rates that impact everyone equally regardless of their level of income. Is this false?

 

[darkace]

Enjoy supporting shitty economics and racist governments from your gilded castle in the Outback!

I support good economics regardless of political side. Brownback is a mix.

Allowing partisanship to cloud judgement is dumb.

You said "A decade" not a few. Regardless, that's just untrue. They are regressive as they set rates that impact everyone equally regardless of their level of income. Is this false?

I said 'These are also long-term measures whose outcomes won't become crystal clear for at least a decade'.

Sales taxes are proportional on consumption. They are regressive on income, but that's largely irrelevant. Consumption is far more important for welfare statistics.

Anyway I'm out. These threads always devolve into nonsense.

 

[tuxfool]

I support good economics regardless of political side. Brownback is a mix.

You don't get to determine that. The results speak for themselves.

 

[thehypocrite]

I said 'These are also long-term measures whose outcomes won't become crystal clear for at least a decade'.

Sales taxes are proportional on consumption. They are regressive on income, but that's largely irrelevant. Consumption is far more important for welfare statistics.

Interesting, why are they irrelevant?

 

[JdFoX187]

Aren't they having a similar issue in Oklahoma too? I remember hearing that their 5 day school week got slashed to 4.

Oklahoma -- for the third year in a row -- is facing a huge budget shortfall. This year, we're at $900 million short. Last year, we were $1.2 billion short. I forgot the total the year before that. And it's all thanks to ridiculous tax cuts on the richest and companies. A lot of school systems had to slash their weeks to four days because they couldn't afford to keep schools open any longer. Then our glorious governor chastises them for doing so, saying they need to find the money to stay open because they're "embarrassing" Oklahoma.

 

[darkace]

Interesting, why are they irrelevant?

Because the progressivity of the tax and transfer system re income is an incomplete story. A land-value tax is highly progressive but is completely orthogonal to income. If we have transfers income is unchanged, if we tax wealth the progressivity re income is unchanged, if we implement lump-sum transfers it may or may not tax income (Thatcher implemented one that taxed wealth).

Consumption statistics gives us a bigger picture (why is why consumption inequality is far more important than income/wealth inequality), but it's still only a partial.

Income is a proxy for other, more meaningful statistics, and it has some pretty glaring omissions (To highlight this the least and most progressive tax systems on income are Sweden and the US, respectively). We aren't interested in setting the progressivity of the tax system according to income (which we ideally wouldn't tax at all), but according to consumption and wealth.

 

[theWB27]

Because the progressivity of the tax and transfer system re income is an incomplete story. A land-value tax is highly progressive but is completely orthogonal to income. If we have transfers income is unchanged, if we tax wealth the progressivity re income is unchanged, if we implement lump-sum transfers it may or may not tax income (Thatcher implemented one that taxed wealth).

Consumption statistics gives us a bigger picture (why is why consumption inequality is far more important than income/wealth inequality), but it's still only a partial.

Income is a proxy for other, more meaningful statistics, and it has some pretty glaring omissions (To highlight this the least and most progressive tax systems on income are Sweden and the US, respectively). We aren't interested in setting the progressivity of the tax system according to income (which we ideally wouldn't tax at all), but according to consumption and wealth.

You read like a dictionary and like someone who cares about the practice more than the outcome. All that matters is the result and the ish doesn't work.