United States Economy

A place to talk about non-EotA-related topics.
Message
Author
jamn455
Corpse
Corpse
Posts: 1024
Joined: August 13th, 2006, 11:17 am
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Location: Trollville, FlAmerica

United States Economy

#1 Post by jamn455 »

I want to know what everyone thinks about how the economy is currently in the United States.

Personally, I can say that in Florida although there is still a high unemployment rate, the economy is slowly getting better, and it seems like the only reason unemployment is so high because people don't try very hard to get jobs because they just expect jobs to land in their laps rather than going out there and getting one. Also on the taxes side, I feel that the way taxes are being done is horrible. A flat tax among everyone would help turn the economy around as well as make it even across the boards. I hate seeing rich people complain when their tax cuts are being taken away for things such as giving jobs to people when its pretty clear there are no jobs being created.
Line 'em up.
"Black people don't play Mega Man, they play with guns or some shit." - Ion
"If it takes two whole days for a giraffe, you know that giraffe is a tall one." - Wade Phillips

User avatar
DarnYak
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2364
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 2:54 pm

Re: United States Economy

#2 Post by DarnYak »

I feel that the way taxes are being done is horrible.
Agreed. Its hard to imagine any alternative could be much worse than the current system, but everyone gets scared once they start talking alternatives so it's never going to get changed. Plus it doesnt help that currently half (or slightly more) of the country doesnt pay income tax, so the majority has a strong incentive not to change anything at all.
A flat tax among everyone would help turn the economy around as well as make it even across the boards.
Flat tax is nice and simple, but has the severe flaw of not accounting for the imbalance of income % devoted to basic needs at lower brackets against higher ones, and ends up unfairly punishing those with lower income. Personally I'm interested in the Fair Tax, although I haven't done enough research into it to fully back it. It basicly drops all income taxes and switches it to sales tax only, I presume with different rates based on the type of goods.

As for turning the economy around, changing taxes unfortunately isn't enough. There needs to be a massive push against things inhibiting job creation - regulation and unions are some of the big ones. Hell, the additional payroll taxes/unemployment insurance/etc. that businesses have to pay on top of a workers salary doesnt help either (I believe it costs around $100k in some states to hire someone at $40k, although I'm not 100% sure I'm remembering the figures right). Having a government willing to do some protectonist measures and encourage stateside job creation would help as well.

DarnYak

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#3 Post by SuIIy »

I think it's pretty bad. The CBO (I believe?) also recently stated the U.S. has a 1/3 chance of returning into a recession. I personally think that if measures aren't taken soon, it will probably happen. The signs imo point to it: massive, stagnant unemployment, high regulation (furthered by the Obama admin), high taxation, huge debt, poor economic growth, etc. The U.S. is grew at 0.4 percent last quarter I think, and around 1% over the past several quarters, or somewhere near there. You need two consecutive quarters of declining GDP (six months) to be in a recession, according to economic terms. I also think the U.S. will be facing hyper inflation, or inflation at the very least. The fed keeps injecting more and more money, or buying up treasury bonds in a hope to spur growth. This wouldn't be a bad thing if the economy was growing to offset that. I agree with Darnyak, tax reform isn't all of it, there has to be long term incentives set in place for businesses to hire again and I don't see it happening. If Obama looses the next election and Romney or someone who knows business gets elected, we may able to turn things around and grow again, but...that's fifteen months away. My opinion.

User avatar
Tehw00tz
Corpse
Corpse
Posts: 1520
Joined: August 13th, 2006, 3:14 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: ДɷϣRØLEɷӟP
Location: New Orleans, ДɷϣRØLEɷӟP, ДɷϣRØLEɷӟP

Re: United States Economy

#4 Post by Tehw00tz »

I can't wait to be part of China in 8 years. I should start learning Mandarin.
ДɷϣRØLEɷӟP

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#5 Post by SuIIy »

I can't wait to be part of China in 8 years. I should start learning Mandarin.
Word.

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#6 Post by Luftwaffles »

SuIIy wrote:<snip>

You won't. The same problems that caused the recession are there; excessive deregulation of the wrong areas in economics (CDOs, derivitives) while simultaneously over-taxing the poor both via. direct income taxation (so that middle-class people, with the most capital among those with least get pushed further and further back) and indirect means (ridiculous medical costs, massive increases in school costs, etc.) The same people who made up a large part of the Great Recession have not been prosecuted or even tried (Wall Street Execs., sub-prime housing lenders, inusrance companies, etc.), their bonuses are well in-tact and profits in Wall Street firms have actually steadily gone up during the recession. The people advising Obama and the people who will be advising Romney/Bachman/whichever Republican wins next will be the same core that advised Bush Jr., Bush Sr. before him and whoever's left from the Reagan days. Both parties are being funded and lobbied largely by the same companies, and taking away spending limits means they can basically throw money at Congress to get them to pass what they want.

All Romney or Obama mean is cosmetic federal differences in social policies; abortion, gay-rights, etc.
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
DarnYak
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2364
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 2:54 pm

Re: United States Economy

#7 Post by DarnYak »

<Damnit I accidentally deleted this. The jist was that Ron Paul would be better but isn't likely to get elected, and Yak made the point of saying that 50% of Americans don't actually get taxed by income, and social welfare mechanisms allow them to spend other people's money.>

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#8 Post by Luftwaffles »

The poor pay taxes in other ways; some that come to mind are debt burdens imposed by things like higher education, medical costs, housing, gas prices, etc. and poorer neighbourhoods (which suffocate small business). There's nothing being done to alleviate this, and the typical line of "they're lazy!" "fix it themselves!" qualifies some of them, but definitely not all or even a majority I'm willing to bet. It's easy to get exploited in the market and more so in America, where laws favor people who've already accumulated capital.

However, the problem now is excessive deregulation is creating more and more wealth disparity and eroding the American middle class. Unlike the poor they often make enough income to pay taxes, are expected to put their kids through school (which some say is the next bubble to burst), etc. When things go bad, as they have gone, they fall further than upper class people- going down a whole step on the social ladder as opposed to just a few hundred thousand or million down from the tens you were at before. What you essentially have now through Congress is socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else; business-people are being insulated by low capital gains tax-rates (relic of the Bush administration) and minimal persecution of overseas tax-havens, minimal restrictions on market-bending things like derivatives and debt-trading, excessive debt spending on pork barrel projects (this cuts ideological and geographical lines; just about everyone's doing it), the ridiculous stimulus-plan- which was nothing more than cash handouts to the people who orchestrated the recent crisis in the first place; walls of US liquidity and constant money borrowing, etc. Not to mention an ongoing war which has really, has little interest to United States national security interests when Mexicans flood over the border every month and you have daily deaths in gang-controlled neighbourhoods all across the US.

Pretty introspective article on the GOP by a former member.

*EDIT: Mother fucker I accidentally edited your post Yak instead of quote responding to it -.-
**EDIT: And we have no post revision history. Man I fail so bad...3:39 AM.. mercy..
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
DarnYak
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2364
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 2:54 pm

Re: United States Economy

#9 Post by DarnYak »

The poor pay taxes in other ways; some that come to mind are debt burdens imposed by things like higher education, medical costs, housing, gas prices, etc. and poorer neighbourhoods (which suffocate small business).
Those aren't taxes. Those are living expenses. Also note I was specifically talking about income taxes only, I realize things like sales taxes and property taxes exist, but those aren't nearly as large and most of them are local - we're talking about the federal government here.
There's nothing being done to alleviate this, and the typical line of "they're lazy!" "fix it themselves!" qualifies some of them, but definitely not all or even a majority I'm willing to bet.
Well it highly depends on the group your talking about, as there's a million different reasons people are poor. Plus I have no idea what cutoff we're even refering to, as a recent study found that those the government defines as "in poverty" (and therefore receiving government assistance) has an average of (I'm going off memory here I can't find the article) 2 tvs, 2 vehicles, a cell phone for everyone, an xbox/ps3, a pc, plenty of food, ample living space per person (more than the total averages of those in europe) and some other crap I can't remember.
the problem now is excessive deregulation is creating more and more wealth disparity and eroding the American middle class
I completely dissagree. Government regulation is aweful and generally just ends up with corruption and rules being written to benefit the wealthy. Big bussinesses like regulation because it gives them power to completely fuck over competators. The main exception is when where's regulation from outside the industry that imposes restrictions on the industry itself, the biggest example being the EPA. And of course, when government regulators fail to do a good job, they almost never get fired or prosecuted. And if they do get fired (more likely they just "retire" for the same result) they end up getting a cozy job in the companies they did favors for.

Note: Being anti-government regulation is not the same as being anti-regulation. Such a thing as private industry regulation does exist, and they have actual incentives to do a good job and consequences for failing.
Unlike the poor they often make enough income to pay taxes, are expected to put their kids through school (which some say is the next bubble to burst), etc.
This relates to my previous point. College expenses are skyrocketing. They happen to coincide almost exactly to whenever the government decides to raise the student loan limits. Who pushes to raise the limits? The schools themselves, but its not like the actual cost of running them is going up that fast, only profits.
What you essentially have now through Congress is socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else
That statement is such crap with how much government assistance is given out. The problem is the rich people can donate to campaigns to get special attention in all laws/regulation, and politicians can buy votes from poor people with tax dollars, but the middle class doesn't fit into that equation at all.
minimal restrictions on market-bending things like derivatives and debt-trading
There shouldn't need to be any restrictions beyond anti-fraud. The problem only exists because of this idiotic "too big to fail" concept which now lets big businesses take any risks they want with assurances of a government bailout. And, of course, no penalties of any sort to those who caused it.

I could say more but I'm tired of typing ;P

DarnYak

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#10 Post by SuIIy »

business-people are being insulated by low capital gains tax-rates
Capital gains isn't income (wages), there is no such transaction between an employer and employee. Therefore, it shouldn't be taxed as such. It's profit from savings, investments, and, well....capital, hence the name. The U.S. also has some of the highest capital gains rates in the world, yet you make the claim the U.S. is even more unfair to big, evil businesses.
There's nothing being done to alleviate this,
Food stamps, welfare, social security, medicaid, medicare, minimum wage, overtime, 40hour work week, unemployment benefits, disability benefits, tax loopholes, affordable housing, student loans, grants, scholarships, medical care (Obamacare)....?

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#11 Post by Luftwaffles »

DarnYak wrote:Those aren't taxes. Those are living expenses. Also note I was specifically talking about income taxes only, I realize things like sales taxes and property taxes exist, but those aren't nearly as large and most of them are local - we're talking about the federal government here.
The state encourages these expenses to incur by doing nothing to lessen them. "Living expenses" in America are disproportionately high compared to other countries and offer a lot less. The debt required to pay for a kid's broken arm, to send them to college, to morgage a house etc. is a virtual tax imposed on everyone in the United States. You're right, it's not the orthodox definition of a tax, but the alternatives (fucked up arm for life, no house, no college, etc.) lead any rational actor to prefer paying it than not paying it. It's like if you put a gun to my head and said "walk up the street". I don't have to, but it's coercive and pretty compelling that I do if I want to live a decent life.
DarnYak wrote:Well it highly depends on the group your talking about, as there's a million different reasons people are poor. Plus I have no idea what cutoff we're even refering to, as a recent study found that those the government defines as "in poverty" (and therefore receiving government assistance) has an average of (I'm going off memory here I can't find the article) 2 tvs, 2 vehicles, a cell phone for everyone, an xbox/ps3, a pc, plenty of food, ample living space per person (more than the total averages of those in europe) and some other crap I can't remember.
Let's see this nameless study, who it's done by and where they did it in before we start jumping to massive conclusions about who's actually poor in the US. I would be surprised to find out people below the American poverty line would be worse off than people living in huts in Africa, but the poverty line in America is of a different scale. A life of fulfillment in the US is often defined in terms of capacity to consume than it is being content with the meagre belongings you have. But a few places seem to dispute this.
DarnYak wrote:I completely dissagree. Government regulation is aweful and generally just ends up with corruption and rules being written to benefit the wealthy. Big bussinesses like regulation because it gives them power to completely fuck over competators. The main exception is when where's regulation from outside the industry that imposes restrictions on the industry itself, the biggest example being the EPA. And of course, when government regulators fail to do a good job, they almost never get fired or prosecuted. And if they do get fired (more likely they just "retire" for the same result) they end up getting a cozy job in the companies they did favors for.

Note: Being anti-government regulation is not the same as being anti-regulation. Such a thing as private industry regulation does exist, and they have actual incentives to do a good job and consequences for failing.
Now we're getting into ideological territories and I know your leanings, so we're just going to be going nowhere- but I'll indulge since I am going back to school and will have to deal with this everyday again. Firstly, countries that regulate have on a whole, been much more economically successful than the United States on a per capita level and in weathering the recent financial crisis. Where's Canada's economic crisis? Our growth has been slowed by yours. Sweden's? Germany's? Even the Deutschbank got in on sub-prime morgage lending and they're not at 0 net growth.

Iceland is a great example of a model Libertarian country that deregulated; it went through, with heavy sponsorship from the US, a complete deregulation of just about every sector of business. All state owned banks, most state owned industries- all were shifted to the private sector. Everything looked good, that is until the country realized that said billionaires had become so by borrowing money from banks that they didn't own, and the banks were borrowing money they didn't own. Money now that Icelanders will have to pay out of their own pocket.

Private industry legislation works in the old American system, pre-Reagan, where smaller companies of individuals essentially invested their own cash into a company and succeeded or failed by their own means. Now, with giant corporations all that money has been completely depersonalized and taken right out of the equation. They're not spending their money, they borrow and spend someone else's.
DarnYak wrote:That statement is such crap with how much government assistance is given out. The problem is the rich people can donate to campaigns to get special attention in all laws/regulation, and politicians can buy votes from poor people with tax dollars, but the middle class doesn't fit into that equation at all.
I must've imagined the stimulus plan then, non-prosecution of any Wall Street executives who burned billions of dollars that weren't theirs, caused people's savings and retirement funds to completely collapse and the continued tax insulation of reach people in the United States. Where are they now? Being hired by other firms or retired, with millions in savings. And the people employed by them (i.e. everyone else?) Without a job, deep in debt, and probably quite a few have suffered home foreclosures. Quote sums it up well.

In regards to federal government assistance, it's meagre compared to other countries- I think you generously overrate how much is given out.
DarnYak wrote:There shouldn't need to be any restrictions beyond anti-fraud. The problem only exists because of this idiotic "too big to fail" concept which now lets big businesses take any risks they want with assurances of a government bailout. And, of course, no penalties of any sort to those who caused it.
How are you going to get there and prevent massive consolidation of competition, who will vast outstrip any competitor in being able to influence government, from doing exactly this? They'll be able to always negotiate "stimulus plans" and government hand-outs. And if they collapse, so will most of their support in Congress, as well as leaving tons of people jobless and companies, banks, etc. insolvent. The system won't right ship though- it just means other competitors will gain influence proportionally to whoever's collapsed. And we get another go at it!

I completely agree though; the "too big to fail" is an incredibly frustrating risk-management reality of modern corporations. Undoubtedly we'd disagree on how to handle it (and fyi, I hated the stimulus plan and did not support it in Canada or in the US).
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#12 Post by Luftwaffles »

SuIIy wrote:Capital gains isn't income (wages), there is no such transaction between an employer and employee. Therefore, it shouldn't be taxed as such. It's profit from savings, investments, and, well....capital, hence the name. The U.S. also has some of the highest capital gains rates in the world, yet you make the claim the U.S. is even more unfair to big, evil businesses.
Not going to get into an ideological pissing match- neither of us are going to agree. Let's just focus on what's factual, namely the second statement about "high" US capital gains rates.

The US Capital Gains tax is some of the lowest in the world- developed and not, short and long-term. Note that comparisons between countries based simply on rate % is actually for the most part it's a superficial chart- in fact, other countries tax assets differently (particularly in Europe) so that de facto tax-rates on what counts as "capital" in the US are actually higher than the chart indicates. Likewise, depending on what state you're in, taxes may be higher or lower off of that margin (and in most, with tax-loopholes everywhere, it's lower).
SuIIy wrote:Food stamps, welfare, social security, medicaid, medicare, minimum wage, overtime, 40hour work week, unemployment benefits, disability benefits, tax loopholes, affordable housing, student loans, grants, scholarships, medical care (Obamacare)....?
Oh yeah. Welfare repeatedly being slashed by federal legislators that insulates people in communities and gives them no incentive to leave, Medicare watered down and not in effect for years to come (where it will probably be abolished), a minimum wage that ensures no employers will hire you if they can help it, a 40-hour work week where overtime is expected and overtime pay is exceptional, unemployment and disability benefits that let you live a comfortable life in a one-room appartment, tax-loop holes exploited by people with either the economic know-how or accountants to use them (excuse me while I go get mine- or wait is that for people in a higher tax-bracket?), student loans that leave you paying interest till you're 50, grants and scholarships for major universities that benefit a few lucky students and the rest have to just deal.

But yeah, they have food stamps. So at least they're not starving.
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
DarnYak
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2364
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 2:54 pm

Re: United States Economy

#13 Post by DarnYak »

Let's see this nameless study, who it's done by and where they did it in before we start jumping to massive conclusions about who's actually poor in the US.
This was brought up not to prove the veracity of the study but to ask who the hell are we talking about.
The state encourages these expenses to incur by doing nothing to lessen them.
I'm completely baffled by your arguements on this front. Without trying to troll, it feels your definition of "indirect taxes" is all expenses that aren't luxuries. The government encourages medical care, what? Pain encourages medical care (unless socialism is taking away decision making power far beyond what I believe possible). Higher education I'll somewhat grant you, but I think that's primarily a push by society.

And I'm not even getting into the arguement of whether the government should be providing these things.
Firstly, countries that regulate have on a whole, been much more economically successful than the United States on a per capita level and in weathering the recent financial crisis.
Considering America is the ground zero cause of the current problems it's not a surprise other countries are fairing better. As for other countries doing better I don't have particular expertise to be able to even fairly compare them.
I must've imagined the stimulus plan then, non-prosecution of any Wall Street executives who burned billions of dollars that weren't theirs, caused people's savings and retirement funds to completely collapse and the continued tax insulation of reach people in the United States. Where are they now? Being hired by other firms or retired, with millions in savings.
Yea, that's what I was bitching about in my post. Why does it seem like you're arguing against me here?
who will vast outstrip any competitor in being able to influence government, from doing exactly this? They'll be able to always negotiate "stimulus plans" and government hand-outs
That's why the government should not have that power in the first place. Dealing with monopolies & unfair competition is however an appropriate government function.

DarnYak

PS. This post is intentionaly trying to cut down on the wall of text.

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#14 Post by SuIIy »

I'm not familiar with Canada's constitution or whatever set of rules you guys follow, but the U.S. was explicitly founded upon supply-side economics (*cough...capitalism) that's particularly why private property is guaranteed and the constitution/bill of rights is written in the negative in relation to the government, i.e. "government shall not"...etc. I don't recall seeing anywhere mention of "big evil business shall not" or "capitalists shall not"...
a minimum wage that ensures no employers will hire you if they can help it, a 40-hour work week where overtime is expected and overtime pay is exceptional,
Luftwaffles, you seem like an intelligent person, but really...this is bullshit. Employers are required to strictly follow those laws, and they do a vast majority of the time. I know several business owners, and the fact you seem to hold a Marxian view of the private sector in general only serves to make this statement more irrational.
The US Capital Gains tax is some of the lowest in the world
Please read some reputable sources...Left-wing, class warfare groups aren't working for your arguments.
But yeah, they have food stamps. So at least they're not starving.
You're more than welcome to donate money or give away your food. :idea:
the poverty line in America
I'm really reluctant to say America has poverty. We honestly don't. Look to the south, at Mexico, or Africa as you mentioned. With all the social nets I just mentioned (you quickly ignored them as factual yet the truth is the poor have easy access to them)"poor" translates (alot of the time) to a series of bad personal choices and not evil, rich capitalists ripping everyone else off.
Iceland is a great example of a model Libertarian country that deregulated;
Iceland follows closely the model of Canadians and Europeans, which is essentially pseudo-socialism to varying degrees (Sweden is virtually totally socialist for example), and not Libertarian. My own political views are Libertarian, and Libertarians overwhelmingly believe in the free-market and minimal government, usually above all else. I'm not sure how on earth you can call anything European even remotely Libertarian...

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#15 Post by Luftwaffles »

SuIIy wrote:I'm not familiar with Canada's constitution or whatever set of rules you guys follow, but the U.S. was explicitly founded upon supply-side economics (*cough...capitalism)... <snip>
Your government was not founded constitutionally on supply side economics, you didn't have any official government ideology that specifically supply-side economics (a modern economic theory) until President Reagan. You probably don't know this, but the original preamble to the Constitution of the United States comes directly from the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776), which reads: "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

Yet your preamble reads: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Woops? I don't think so. America was certainly very influenced by Lockean property theories but in the end, when it came down to it, they weren't willing to pin themselves on any one ideology. Even you might agree it's up to the states themselves as to whether they want to have medicare or welfare.

With regards to the minimum wage, gimme a break. Ask anyone from the food, retail or finance industry about where a 40-hour work week will get them. On top of that, maybe just google "40-hour work week" or take a gander on wiki's sources. It's expected that you work overtime, and there are enough loopholes in US financial laws to not have to compensate people for doing it.
Please read some reputable sources...Left-wing, class warfare groups aren't working for your arguments.
Left-wing "class warfare" groups? The National Poverty Center at the University of Michigan (in Ann Arbor, one of the most Republican areas of Michigan), the Institute for Research on Poverty- a branch out of UW-Madison (the only liberal institution mentioned here) and the NCCP for god's sake, a subsidary funded and sponsored by Columbia.. one of the richest, most prestigious schools in the United States? Who've produced a Republican President, numerous Republican senators and congressmen, economic thinkers- I don't even need to go on. You didn't read any of it, because it doesn't fit with your worldview.
You're more than welcome to donate money or give away your food. :idea: I'm really reluctant to say America has poverty. We honestly don't. Look to the south, at Mexico, or Africa as you mentioned. With all the social nets I just mentioned (you quickly ignored them as factual yet the truth is the poor have easy access to them)"poor" translates (alot of the time) to a series of bad personal choices and not evil, rich capitalists ripping everyone else off.
Well there's nothing stopping from people donating now- so why isn't that happening? That's the only thing separating a large body of the American populace from those countries, is the minimal social net you've provided them. And though I don't know that Libertarianism is the answer, I agree that there is so much corruption in government many of these services end up polluted and useless. But I suppose as there's no poverty, you'd love to go for a stroll though in South-Central LA, the Bronx or Miami Gardens right? Check out those nice houses on the east side of Cleveland? Maybe do a weekend trip down to Indianapolis. I hear south Cincinnati looks real nice too, and New Orleans especially during the summer rains :mrgreen: .
Iceland follows closely the model of Canadians and Europeans, which is essentially pseudo-socialism to varying degrees (Sweden is virtually totally socialist for example), and not Libertarian. My own political views are Libertarian, and Libertarians overwhelmingly believe in the free-market and minimal government, usually above all else. I'm not sure how on earth you can call anything European even remotely Libertarian...
What are you talking about. I just talked about Iceland's deregulation. It did follow this, then it took a ton of American LIBERTARIAN advice on how to run it's economy, and it is now the among the most indebted countries in Europe. Uh oh.
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#16 Post by Luftwaffles »

DarnYak wrote:This was brought up not to prove the veracity of the study but to ask who the hell are we talking about.
Probably pointless to get into it I guess, I don't think we'll get anywhere.
I'm completely baffled by your arguements on this front. Without trying to troll, it feels your definition of "indirect taxes" is all expenses that aren't luxuries. The government encourages medical care, what? Pain encourages medical care (unless socialism is taking away decision making power far beyond what I believe possible). Higher education I'll somewhat grant you, but I think that's primarily a push by society.
An expense that isn't a luxury? They're necessities. Education I agree is more something from societal inertia and higher education is not- but it is beneficial (or would be if it weren't so inflated). But medicare you need. You break your leg, it needs a cast; it's not a question of why but how much. In America, the how much is a lot of $. My point is there's no safety net for people who fall into these traps. Welfare won't pay for them. Employment insurance will last.. for how long? In many states it's been severely cut. All your left with is going into debt.
Considering America is the ground zero cause of the current problems it's not a surprise other countries are fairing better. As for other countries doing better I don't have particular expertise to be able to even fairly compare them.
Other countries are also dealing with plenty of problems, it's not so much an excuse as it is symptomatic of how the American financial system has functioned of recent, but I'll leave it too since there's no point doing cross-country comparisons unless you know about the other countries.
DarnYak wrote:Yea, that's what I was bitching about in my post. Why does it seem like you're arguing against me here?
It was a response to the first part, I agree with the second. I should've said that, but oh well.
DarnYak wrote:PS. This post is intentionaly trying to cut down on the wall of text.
They're inevitable in political discussions. Embrace them!
DarnYak wrote:That's why the government should not have that power in the first place. Dealing with monopolies & unfair competition is however an appropriate government function.
It's an argument worth considering, but it's hard to graft the government with the capacity to deal with monopolies and unfair competition and not have it reach over into protecting them at the same.
- Luftwaffles

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#17 Post by SuIIy »

What are you talking about. I just talked about Iceland's deregulation. It did follow this, then it took a ton of American LIBERTARIAN advice on how to run it's economy, and it is now the among the most indebted countries in Europe. Uh oh.
No. This is wrong. The U.S. hasn't embraced 'Libertarian' economics for well over fifty years...perhaps more. Instead, we've been following the wonderful example of European and Canadian Socialism...which you seem to be in love with. It's no wonder then this country's fiscal matters are in the shit hole....
Your government was not founded constitutionally on supply side economics, you didn't have any official government ideology that specifically supply-side economics (a modern economic theory) until President Reagan. You probably don't know this, but the original preamble to the Constitution of the United States comes directly from the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776),
Wrong here for two reasons. A, I did know that actually. And B, I wasn't referring to any legal document, because there wasn't one, as you've stated, but rather the Founding Fathers or close associates of them. Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith, you've heard them, I presume? Big Capitalist thinkers...

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#18 Post by Luftwaffles »

SuIIy wrote:No. This is wrong. The U.S. hasn't embraced 'Libertarian' economics for well over fifty years...perhaps more. Instead, we've been following the wonderful example of European and Canadian Socialism...which you seem to be in love with. It's no wonder then this country's fiscal matters are in the shit hole.
You misunderstood me, I said Iceland followed Libertarian deregulatory strategies promoted by US business-folk (it actually is more Laissez-faire Capitalism to be fair, then Libertarianism)- not that the US had gone down that road. Though the US has basically devolved from FDR's social welfare system/LBJ's idea of a "Great Society" and moved more and more towards financial deregulation, but the kind that frustrates both socialists and libertarians. Canada's books are balanced, Europe north of the Med. (where excessive deregulation is mixed in with horrible bureaucracies and widespread fraud that would make both ends of the political spectrum cringe) and east of Britain is weathering the crisis fine- mostly worried about having to bail out the failing Eurozone countries.
Wrong here for two reasons. A, I did know that actually. And B, I wasn't referring to any legal document, because there wasn't one, as you've stated, but rather the Founding Fathers or close associates of them. Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith, you've heard them, I presume? Big Capitalist thinkers...
"I'm not familiar with Canada's constitution or whatever set of rules you guys follow, but the U.S. was explicitly founded upon supply-side economics (*cough...capitalism)... <snip>"

You mentioned our constitution, then that, and what other conclusions am I to draw? I'm not a mind reader. I agree the United States is founded on capitalism though, it's just erroneous to then draw from that conclusion its people should automatically neglect the welfare of their fellow citizens.

Being poor is also not always a series of bad personal choices- like, for instance, being born poor. Certainly some people have made bad decisions and ended up poor, but some people have made bad decisions and ended up rich (take a look at the financial crisis for an idea).
- Luftwaffles

SuIIy
Resident
Resident
Posts: 152
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 3:58 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Sully24

Re: United States Economy

#19 Post by SuIIy »

Being poor is also not always a series of bad personal choices- like, for instance, being born poor. Certainly some people have made bad decisions and ended up poor, but some people have made bad decisions and ended up rich (take a look at the financial crisis for an idea).
If you re-read my previous comment you'll notice I took great care not to say always. That being said, it doesn't mean it isn't either. Additionally, you promote a typical view of capitalism by the critics: that the rich are born rich and keep getting richer, and the poor are born poor, and well, keep getting poorer. Again, things could very well be different in Canada, I understand that, but to make such claims that that is the situation here in America is either woefully ignorant, or plainly blind of the truth. Oprah, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, numerous U.S representative and senators, businessmen, and even several acquaintances of mine where born "poor", or into modest households, yet look where they are now? These are all rags-to-riches examples, and keep in mind these were nobody people beforehand. It's because of capitalism, hard work, and an incentive for profit they've been able to achieve so much and make something of themselves. Equally, the examples I just listed are proof that class warfare politics, a favorite tactic for left-wing promoters--and yourself--is a hoax and not grounded in reality.

jamn455
Corpse
Corpse
Posts: 1024
Joined: August 13th, 2006, 11:17 am
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Location: Trollville, FlAmerica

Re: United States Economy

#20 Post by jamn455 »

There is a finite amount of money, not all poor people can grow up and end up like Oprah, Bill Gates, etc. To make money, you have to have a good idea, and know how to market said idea, and as with money, there are not an infinite amount of good ideas that can be executed by people, especially those without ample resources. In a world with big corporations with billion dollar R&D departments, it is much harder for the little man to come up with these life changing concepts compared to the first computers and such. The small minority of poor people who end up rich cannot translate to the vast majority of poor people who do not have these resources such as education. It is fairly clear that the quality of grade school education in the United States is dropping, at least in Florida I know this to be true, and with schools more worried about standardized testing rather than nurturing the skills of an individual, many brilliant minds lose that spark because those skills are never embraced because they have to learn what makes the schools look good for funding purposes.

And when it comes to Senators, Representatives, and the majority of businesspeople, their riches come from a very undocumented dirty business. Interest groups which buy privileges from politicians are just one example of how they make the majority of their money. And its not like these politicians have no back up plan if all falls through. Marco Rubio, a republican senator from Florida, was hired to teach at Florida International University whilst doing his senatorial duties for a Florida Politics course which he makes 24k for teaching Monday/Friday when Senate isn't in session. Many other politicians are holding Law degrees from prestigious institutions, so its not like these politicians are in rough spots, they are not like the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs where if their idea fell through, they were even further in the hole with nothing to fall back on. And businessmen who will sell out their colleagues in such a cutthroat business in order to get that one big score that can make or break their careers are not the same as the people who have a great idea and nurture it into something they are happy with that just happens to make them money.

I am not saying that it is impossible for people living in terrible neighborhoods cannot become non-corrupt and successful people, I am just saying the odds are stacked against them when compared to more financially blessed individuals.
Line 'em up.
"Black people don't play Mega Man, they play with guns or some shit." - Ion
"If it takes two whole days for a giraffe, you know that giraffe is a tall one." - Wade Phillips

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#21 Post by Luftwaffles »

Jamn puts it well, 'specially the bit on politicans/businessmen often duelling either as teachers or consultants in private industry.

I think of touting people who've gone rags-to-riches is not unlike good bands. You ever gone into a bar or a club, heard a band or a DJ and thought "fuck that was amazing", looked for them and couldn't find out who the fuck they were? No bands that go around play shows, scrape a living and their music is better than Soulja Boy, Miley Cyrus, whoever, etc. (or at least you think it is). Truth is, it doesn't matter how good they might be, because there's only so many good people there can be in commercial industries. takes hard work, strong marketing, a convincing financial plan, social networking and/or socio-political know-how to make it big. People with resources get big head starts, people without them are left behind. If you start with a full band, a studio, a guitar, set of drums, nice sound equipment, a producer, a manager, contacts in the industry to help you get along, people already interested in your concerts simply because they know you personally... it goes a long way, you know. Not to say some poor punk fucks can't make it, but if you can't even get the guitar odds are a bit against you. That one band though perpetuates the idea that anyone can make it big, when in truth the vast majority won't.

According to TNS Financial Services, there's about 2,886,200 Americans who are worth more than a million dollars (down from 3,028,000 just before the crisis). That's about 0.009% of the American population. How 'bout the other 99.1% of Americans? Be hard to believe some of them didn't have good ideas. I'm sure some will make it up to that last, while another 5-10% will make it up to the hundreds of thousands a year (and see a chunk drained in taxes). Rest of America's gonna have to just deal.

I don't know where you're getting all this class warfare stuff from, I haven't mentioned it once as any sort of support for what I've said. It seems like you're trying to anticipate an argument that isn't there, and certainly not one- if you wanted to discuss it all, that would be sufficiently treated in a sentence or two.
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
Discombobulator
Retired
Retired
Posts: 710
Joined: September 19th, 2006, 4:16 pm
Battle.net name: Karunecm
Contact:

Re: United States Economy

#22 Post by Discombobulator »

Luftwaffles wrote:Jamn puts it well, 'specially the bit on politicans/businessmen often duelling either as teachers or consultants in private industry.

I think of touting people who've gone rags-to-riches is not unlike good bands. You ever gone into a bar or a club, heard a band or a DJ and thought "fuck that was amazing", looked for them and couldn't find out who the fuck they were? No bands that go around play shows, scrape a living and their music is better than Soulja Boy, Miley Cyrus, whoever, etc. (or at least you think it is). Truth is, it doesn't matter how good they might be, because there's only so many good people there can be in commercial industries. takes hard work, strong marketing, a convincing financial plan, social networking and/or socio-political know-how to make it big. People with resources get big head starts, people without them are left behind. If you start with a full band, a studio, a guitar, set of drums, nice sound equipment, a producer, a manager, contacts in the industry to help you get along, people already interested in your concerts simply because they know you personally... it goes a long way, you know. Not to say some poor punk fucks can't make it, but if you can't even get the guitar odds are a bit against you. That one band though perpetuates the idea that anyone can make it big, when in truth the vast majority won't.

According to TNS Financial Services, there's about 2,886,200 Americans who are worth more than a million dollars (down from 3,028,000 just before the crisis). That's about 0.009% of the American population. How 'bout the other 99.1% of Americans? Be hard to believe some of them didn't have good ideas. I'm sure some will make it up to that last, while another 5-10% will make it up to the hundreds of thousands a year (and see a chunk drained in taxes). Rest of America's gonna have to just deal.

I don't know where you're getting all this class warfare stuff from, I haven't mentioned it once as any sort of support for what I've said. It seems like you're trying to anticipate an argument that isn't there, and certainly not one- if you wanted to discuss it all, that would be sufficiently treated in a sentence or two.
Hipster detected.
I'm this forum's MVP.

User avatar
Luftwaffles
Communist
Posts: 398
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 pm
Realm: Azeroth (U.S. East)
Battle.net name: Ion_Killer
WereWabbit
Canucklehead
Luftwaffles
Location: Canada

Re: United States Economy

#23 Post by Luftwaffles »

I'd run and hide out in the woods but it'd get my plaid all muddy when it eventually rains. My glasses have no lenses though so at least I'd be able to see I guess.
- Luftwaffles

User avatar
SeasonsOfLove
Resident
Resident
Posts: 118
Joined: May 27th, 2006, 8:18 pm

Re: United States Economy

#24 Post by SeasonsOfLove »

I haven't read everything, but I feel the need to say just this: A college education at a top-10/top-20 university, which used to essentially guarantee you a job, does no such thing. Half of my graduating class from last year, from Duke, couldn't find a job. The stats don't reflect that, because a good many decided to go to graduate school rather than attempting, in vain, to get jobs. Even engineers from top-10/20 schools cannot get jobs. Total student loan debt is now larger than credit card debt. Forget the economy for everyone, the economy (and really, the government, too, due to their decisions to allow the debt to balloon since 2000) is killing my generation. Forget everything else, that is a problem. Young people are the future, and when you screw them over due to governmental decisions and de to the sad state of the economy, you screw over the future of the country, directly or indirectly.

User avatar
Discombobulator
Retired
Retired
Posts: 710
Joined: September 19th, 2006, 4:16 pm
Battle.net name: Karunecm
Contact:

Re: United States Economy

#25 Post by Discombobulator »

I'll just say that you guys laughed at me back when I told you that America's doom is coming.
I'm this forum's MVP.

Post Reply