|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
On Jun 20, 6:11*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
Let's get the spending in harmony with the revenues. Is this rocket science or what? The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. Lets say you maxed out your credit when times were good, and then you suffered a big drop in income. Is now a good time to pay down that debt? Maybe you could, but with your income already lower, paying the debt off will make your living standard that much worse. All of the politicians should know this, but since ruining our economy and living standard seems to be part of the "plan", no doubt they will eventually push this through... and pin the blame on someone else. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
Ron Ruff wrote:
The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. That's not true. The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. The appearance of gratuitous, pointless financial derivatives like CDOs were naked evidence of two things: taxation of the ultra- wealthy was too low, and there were not enough disincentives for economically unproductive investments. The result was destructively rich people inventing destructive ways to try to multiply their already excessive fortunes-- and predictably, the crash that followed. Neither of the basic problems has been addressed, so the next even worse crash is already in store. But just fixing the first problem by making progressive taxation work the way it's supposed to (by taxing the richest at the highest rates) would solve the debt and deficit problems without having to cut basic services or take away what shreds are left of the social safety net. Fixing the second problem by limiting tax incentives (e.g. capital gains being taxed less than earned income) to only economically productive investments would solve unemployment. Trouble is, both the indebtedness of government and massive unemployment are by design; they work for the benefit of the ultra- rich. The baronial class lend the money they didn't pay as taxes back to the taxpayers at interest, and get to screw workers out of fair pay and reasonable working conditions without consequences when one out of four of us is unemployed. Chalo |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
"Ron Ruff" wrote in message
... On Jun 20, 6:11 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: Let's get the spending in harmony with the revenues. Is this rocket science or what? The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. Lets say you maxed out your credit when times were good, and then you suffered a big drop in income. Is now a good time to pay down that debt? Maybe you could, but with your income already lower, paying the debt off will make your living standard that much worse. All of the politicians should know this, but since ruining our economy and living standard seems to be part of the "plan", no doubt they will eventually push this through... and pin the blame on someone else. I mostly agree with your above analysis, but it is time to bite the bullet. Stop the spending even if it causes a catastrophe. Then we can start over with a clean slate. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
"Chalo" wrote in message
... Ron Ruff wrote: The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. That's not true. The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. The appearance of gratuitous, pointless financial derivatives like CDOs were naked evidence of two things: taxation of the ultra- wealthy was too low, and there were not enough disincentives for economically unproductive investments. The result was destructively rich people inventing destructive ways to try to multiply their already excessive fortunes-- and predictably, the crash that followed. Let us say all of the above is true. Have either the Dems or Repubs ever done anything to prevent any of it? I think not. Neither of the basic problems has been addressed, so the next even worse crash is already in store. But just fixing the first problem by making progressive taxation work the way it's supposed to (by taxing the richest at the highest rates) would solve the debt and deficit problems without having to cut basic services or take away what shreds are left of the social safety net. Nope, it won't fix it. We are way too far gone. Fixing the second problem by limiting tax incentives (e.g. capital gains being taxed less than earned income) to only economically productive investments would solve unemployment. It might help a bit, but not much. Trouble is, both the indebtedness of government and massive unemployment are by design; they work for the benefit of the ultra- rich. The baronial class lend the money they didn't pay as taxes back to the taxpayers at interest, and get to screw workers out of fair pay and reasonable working conditions without consequences when one out of four of us is unemployed. Blaming the rich for our economic problem doesn't work since everyone wants to get something for nothing. The middle and working classes are as much to blame for our predicament as the rich. A capitalist economy doesn't work perfectly. It is still better than all other economic systems, especially if you want to create a large prosperous middle class. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
On 6/21/2011 1:19 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
wrote in message ... Ron Ruff wrote: The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. That's not true. The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. The appearance of gratuitous, pointless financial derivatives like CDOs were naked evidence of two things: taxation of the ultra- wealthy was too low, and there were not enough disincentives for economically unproductive investments. The result was destructively rich people inventing destructive ways to try to multiply their already excessive fortunes-- and predictably, the crash that followed. Let us say all of the above is true. Have either the Dems or Repubs ever done anything to prevent any of it? I think not. [...] Both wings of the duopoly are primarily funded by the same Wall Street interests, so both fail to represent the people. Without publicly funded elections and instant runoff voting, democracy is dead at the federal and state levels in the US. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
On 6/21/2011 1:04 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"Ron wrote in message ... On Jun 20, 6:11 pm, "Edward wrote: Let's get the spending in harmony with the revenues. Is this rocket science or what? The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. Lets say you maxed out your credit when times were good, and then you suffered a big drop in income. Is now a good time to pay down that debt? Maybe you could, but with your income already lower, paying the debt off will make your living standard that much worse. All of the politicians should know this, but since ruining our economy and living standard seems to be part of the "plan", no doubt they will eventually push this through... and pin the blame on someone else. I mostly agree with your above analysis, but it is time to bite the bullet. Stop the spending even if it causes a catastrophe. Then we can start over with a clean slate. But the catastrophe is not necessary - a one-time wealth tax on the super rich would fix the problem. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
On 2011-06-22, =?UTF-8?B?VMK6bSBTaGVybcKqbiDCsF/CsA==?= "" wrote:
Both wings of the duopoly are primarily funded by the same Wall Street interests, so both fail to represent the people. Without publicly funded elections and instant runoff voting, democracy is dead at the federal and state levels in the US. As Gore Vidal famously noted, "America has one political party with two right wings." -- -John ) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
On Jun 21, 11:29*am, Chalo wrote:
That's not true. *The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. I think you are missing the point... paying down the debt will result in money being removed from the economy... at the time when we can least afford to do it. It would be very painful. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 6/21/2011 1:19 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: wrote in message ... Ron Ruff wrote: The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. That's not true. The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. The appearance of gratuitous, pointless financial derivatives like CDOs were naked evidence of two things: taxation of the ultra- wealthy was too low, and there were not enough disincentives for economically unproductive investments. The result was destructively rich people inventing destructive ways to try to multiply their already excessive fortunes-- and predictably, the crash that followed. Let us say all of the above is true. Have either the Dems or Repubs ever done anything to prevent any of it? I think not. [...] Both wings of the duopoly are primarily funded by the same Wall Street interests, so both fail to represent the people. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps both the Repubs and the Dems represent the people perfectly? Without publicly funded elections and instant runoff voting, democracy is dead at the federal and state levels in the US. Democracy, like capitalism, is not perfect but it is still better than all other systems. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Failure of Society
Chalo wrote:
Ron Ruff wrote: The reason why Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II ran up huge deficits was because it does in fact boost the economy. Of course this is temporary. It's like putting extra spending money on the credit card. They did this to mask the fact that their socio-economic policies were gutting the middle class and ruining our economy. Then the pile of financial fraud (a separate issue) finally hit the fan in 2008... and because the debt was already so high, we have no effective response. Paying down the debt will further tank the economy... there is no way around it... we are damned either way. That's not true. The super rich are not fairly taxed, and are not currently putting their fortunes to uses that benefit society as a whole. Not fairly taxed? Or just over paid? http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/co...tent/12333.htm $180,001 and over $55,850 plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000 That is the highest tax threshold in Australia for individuals income tax. Unless you actively avoid paying tax, which I realise happens, it seems like quite a hefty tax bill. It seems difficult to understand how someone can be worth $180,000 , yet those that sit at the top are often paid far more. -- JS. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mishandling of Risk in Society | Ian Smith | UK | 1 | June 3rd 09 02:46 PM |
Cycling and Society | Just zis Guy, you know?[_2_] | UK | 21 | March 6th 09 07:22 PM |
Backward society? | Tamyka Bell | Australia | 11 | June 14th 06 03:30 AM |
Unicycling Society of America | kraze | Unicycling | 19 | June 10th 04 07:22 AM |
A secret society? | wentz | Unicycling | 8 | May 19th 04 05:43 PM |