Register All Albums FAQ Community Experience
Go Back   New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com > Main > Everything Else > Full Disclosure

Birthers

this is a discussion within the Full Disclosure Community Forum; Originally Posted by jcp026 Guys, I think we're fooling ourselves if we think either one of the candidates is going to fix the economy. Let's talk about the economy...NOW: So, there's no question that the major problem with the economy ...

Like Tree48Likes

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-20-2012, 08:08 AM   #1
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by jcp026 View Post
Guys, I think we're fooling ourselves if we think either one of the candidates is going to fix the economy. Let's talk about the economy...NOW:

So, there's no question that the major problem with the economy right now is a lack of demand. Demand is down because people aren't stupid enough to put everything on credit cards anymore, people can't borrow against their homes any more because they're either underwater or have lost the house entirely, and wages, though mostly stagnant, have actually gone down in the last thirty years. The minimum wage now, adjusted for inflation, is lower than it was at its inception. And, last I heard, there are still four job seekers for every one job opening. Demand is down. No doubt about it.

How do we get wages up?
-Well, the minimum wage could be tied to inflation, which would push it up a bit now and increase the buying power of the working poor and help increase demand.
-Employer based health care places a HUGE BURDEN on our businesses. When you factor in what businesses spend to help pay for our insurance, which the government is already subsidizing, compensation has gone up. While not as high as profits, still a considerable amount. We can't keep subsidizing this and, with the ever increasing cost of health care, business can't afford to keep it up. We could stop subsidizing this and, naturally, most business will stop paying for our health coverage. Now, I'm not going to pretend that the bulk of money that would be freed up wouldn't just increase the profit margins, but, over time, I think we'd see wages tick up and removing this burden would make the U.S. more attractive to foreign business. I know of at least one case where a Japanese car company built a factor in Canada instead of the U.S. because of the cost of health care (and no, Obama Care doesn't have anything to do with it).
-Another, and more awesome, way to increase demand while simultaneously stabilizing the financial system would be what is a good tax (known as a Pigouvian Tax) that Luigi Zingales mentions in A Capitalism For The People. He talks about "a tax on short-term debt (with maturity of less than a year, for example), [can] discourage both excessive leverage and short-term leverage, preventing a crisis. Also, a 1 percent tax on outstanding short-term debt would raise $21.5 billion dollars annually just among the top nine institutions." He goes on to say that that amount would equal the tax liabilities of the bottom 65 million households who make less than $35,000. He doesn't exactly advocate this, but I'd take it one step further and say that for 5 years (a reasonable time to "fix" the economy, if we do what I want) the taxes of those 65 million households SHOULD be exempted. Paid for by this type of Pigouvian Tax and we put $21.5 billion dollars in the hands of the people most likely to spend it and, voila, we increase demand. But I have to stress that we write into this tax bill that those cuts for the bottom 65 million CAN NOT BE EXTENDED! It can be a BS political weapon. We have to take the debt seriously and, outside of Bill Clinton and Dwight Eisenhower, we haven't been very good at doing that.

-But what about my health insurance, you douche?!
GREAT QUESTION! A Public Option, where people opt in and pay some rate (just like with private insurance) then the federal government can insure them. It could be set up in a way that IT WOULD ALWAYS BREAK EVEN. Not bilking the taxpayer or the people using the insurance, and not adding to the debt. We could also allow people to purchase insurance across state lines, which would probably lead to crappier private insurance, but it would be cheaper insurance.

What about the job creators?
-Traditional Supply Side (Trickle-Down) Economics DOES NOT WORK! But we can tweak it. Just giving rich people and corporations money doesn't create jobs. That should be obvious right now with near record high corporate profits and taxes at, at least, 30 year lows. So how do we "tweak" it? We could say to corporations that all of the loopholes are gone. The corporate tax rate is 28%, but if you create a certain number (or percentage) of jobs in the U.S. then you can push your rate down to 18%. You could also include a couple of tax breaks that we know work and, if they took advantage of them, they could get their rate down to 12% (or pretty much the lowest in the world). But 12% is the absolute rock bottom. You will pay taxes. You will contribute.

What about taxes in general, you douche?
-Now you're just being mean. I believe that the best way to "clean up" the tax code is to get rid of all tax breaks. Then we can leave all of the rates the same and increase revenue. I also support raising the top rate to 39.6% also known as the rate from about 12 years ago.
-But what about small businesses, you stupid ass? Ouch. The "Small Business" label includes Bechtel, which took in $31 BILLION a couple of years ago. Not what most of us think of when we think of a small business. I think we should change the definition of "small business" or, if it's possible, pull them out of the individual tax system that we're in and into a system just for small businesses. A progressive system, to be sure, but a system that wouldn't lead to big tax increases for Mom and Pop spots. I don't have any idea how this would be done and haven't heard anyone talk mention it, so I can't elaborate. I'd like to add, though, that under the current system, with loopholes included, raising the top rate back to 39.6% would only affect about 2% of "small businesses."

With our current political system, how does this get done?
-It doesn't. Without campaign finance reform, getting rid of gerrymandering, reforming Congress and the filibuster, and pulling more people into the voting booths (Australian-style), none of this is possible.

Someone, please, respond seriously to this. I don't have anyone to talk to about it.
Hey, guys! Remember this post? Comment on this post. Critiques and any ideas of your own.
jcp026 is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 10:21 AM   #2
Truth Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R)
Posts: 24,750
Originally Posted by jcp026 View Post
Hey, guys! Remember this post? Comment on this post. Critiques and any ideas of your own.
I think your entire notion of Goverment actually helping by doing more is flawed.

The only thing Government is good at is getting in the way of progress.

The less they interfere the better.

Wages will rise when workers deserve it and businesses can afford it.

Health insurance isn't a right. Provide an atmosphere of competition and it will become affordable. Goverment interference drives costs up.

Trickle down does indeed work. Government interference (over-taxation, over-regulation, unfunded mandates etc) leads to lower wages, more layoffs and outsourcing jobs.

The fair tax or some form of flat tax is the way to go. The main problem as I see it is there are too many people not paying their fair share. And those are the ones who want to raise taxes on the successful, who ARE paying more than their fair share. EVERYONE should pay taxes. If you don't pay taxes, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Just an opinion

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive - Thomas Jefferson

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. - Thomas Jefferson
Danno is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 06:20 PM   #3
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by Danno View Post
I think your entire notion of Goverment actually helping by doing more is flawed.

The only thing Government is good at is getting in the way of progress.

The less they interfere the better.

Wages will rise when workers deserve it and businesses can afford it.

Health insurance isn't a right. Provide an atmosphere of competition and it will become affordable. Goverment interference drives costs up.

Trickle down does indeed work. Government interference (over-taxation, over-regulation, unfunded mandates etc) leads to lower wages, more layoffs and outsourcing jobs.

The fair tax or some form of flat tax is the way to go. The main problem as I see it is there are too many people not paying their fair share. And those are the ones who want to raise taxes on the successful, who ARE paying more than their fair share. EVERYONE should pay taxes. If you don't pay taxes, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Just an opinion

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive - Thomas Jefferson

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. - Thomas Jefferson
Trickle-down works based on what? As long as American workers are competing with workers in low wage countries then wages will NOT rise. Are you kidding? Do we want to be China now? I don't get it. Companies move to countries with far less than a "living wage," and countries that they can pollute freely.

A book I read not too long ago, can't remember which one, talks about externalities. Those are costs that businesses inflict on someone else that they don't pay for. They give an example of a small business that is receiving an award at a ceremony in front of the store, but in the back there is a hill that slopes down to a stream and you can see that they're just dumping all of their waste products into the stream. If they'd been paying for the cost of disposing of their waste properly, then they might not even be profitable. Should they still receive this award? Should the government and law enforcement step in to shut this down?
A public option DOES NOT imply that health insurance is a right and it wouldn't necessarily add to the debt. Those tax cuts I mention for the are temporary to help the economy, everyone in my DOES pay taxes and all of the loopholes are gone.

I'm not saying that more government is necessarily better. I'm not saying that less government is better. I'm saying that better government is better.
A government that is responsible to the people instead of "monied interests."
jcp026 is offline  
Old 07-21-2012, 12:11 PM   #4
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mandeville, LA
Posts: 38,514
Blog Entries: 29
Originally Posted by Danno View Post
I think your entire notion of Goverment actually helping by doing more is flawed.

The only thing Government is good at is getting in the way of progress.

The less they interfere the better.

Wages will rise when workers deserve it and businesses can afford it.

Health insurance isn't a right. Provide an atmosphere of competition and it will become affordable. Goverment interference drives costs up.

Trickle down does indeed work. Government interference (over-taxation, over-regulation, unfunded mandates etc) leads to lower wages, more layoffs and outsourcing jobs.

The fair tax or some form of flat tax is the way to go. The main problem as I see it is there are too many people not paying their fair share. And those are the ones who want to raise taxes on the successful, who ARE paying more than their fair share. EVERYONE should pay taxes. If you don't pay taxes, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Just an opinion

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive - Thomas Jefferson

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. - Thomas Jefferson
Post of the thread! So the question then becomes when will enough of the populace realize this and vote accordingly?
SmashMouth is offline  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:03 PM   #5
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by SmashMouth View Post
Post of the thread! So the question then becomes when will enough of the populace realize this and vote accordingly?
It's sad that you think that.
jcp026 is offline  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:30 AM   #6
Donated Plasma
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 18,556
Blog Entries: 5
Originally Posted by jcp026 View Post
It's sad that you think that.
I don't think it's sad at all actually. Yeah, the tax code needs work, but this country was not founded on "big" government. In fact this country was founded on anti-big government. The socialists do NOT have it better. Ask them. Don't ask the Socialism wanna be Californians. Ask the people living it.

Now, my friend from Russia thinks Communism beats Capitalism hands down. His perception is the Russia he grew up in was one where a government stayed out of the way but made sure everyone had what they needed.

Of course he is here. Not there. And this escapes him completely.

No, big government is not the answer. Getting back to the Constitution is the answer, and that means a lot of people in Washington will have to cease business as usual, which is the business of making the under class more and more reliant on government (them).

The only way we're going to legislate our way out of the mess we're in in to legislate big government back to the stone ages. Can that happen? I'm not so sure. As I've already said, I don't know that I have enough faith in American's anymore, but it will happen or sure as the fall of Rome the America my kids grow up in will be a mere shell of what the founders had in their vision. Hell. It already is...
SapperSaint and Srgt. Hulka like this.

C'mon Man...
saintfan is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 11:08 AM   #7
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,776
Blog Entries: 15
Originally Posted by jcp026 View Post
Hey, guys! Remember this post? Comment on this post. Critiques and any ideas of your own.
... I'm gonna' need clarification on who you were referring to as a 'douche' & 'stupid ass' first before I put any effort into that one, .
SloMotion is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 06:06 PM   #8
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by SloMotion View Post
... I'm gonna' need clarification on who you were referring to as a 'douche' & 'stupid ass' first before I put any effort into that one, .
The reader is referring to me as those things when asking the questions.
jcp026 is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 06:17 PM   #9
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 6,324
Originally Posted by jcp026 View Post
The reader is referring to me as those things when asking the questions.
Closing tax loopholes is the key. The tax rates could stay where they are as long as the ultra wealthy are not allowed to shelter funds. The whole Buffett pays at a lower tax rate than his secretary was overblown, but there still was some truth there.

As for raising the minimum wage, that affects less than 20% of the country, and unless you are talking about a 50% increase, those people will still be living in poverty:
40 hours X $7.25 X 52 weeks = $16 K a year. amazingly low number
jcp026 likes this.
ScottF is offline  
Old 07-20-2012, 07:38 PM   #10
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by ScottF View Post
Closing tax loopholes is the key. The tax rates could stay where they are as long as the ultra wealthy are not allowed to shelter funds. The whole Buffett pays at a lower tax rate than his secretary was overblown, but there still was some truth there.

As for raising the minimum wage, that affects less than 20% of the country, and unless you are talking about a 50% increase, those people will still be living in poverty:
40 hours X $7.25 X 52 weeks = $16 K a year. amazingly low number
Can't disagree with any of that, but the increase in the minimum wage I talked about wasn't necessarily to bring people out of poverty but to increase demand and bring the wage more in line with what it was at its inception.
jcp026 is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts