What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

I believe people with more money spend it and it does good things for the whole economy.
I believe people with their money make better spending decisions, including charity and goodwill, than government would with it. Why? Less overhead for one.
I believe we're ignoring one entire side of the governmental budget equation, namely, spending.

We'll never tax our way to prosperity (hasn't ever been done), and especially so when we can't stop spending* like sailors on shore leave.


*Politicians have to keep getting re-elected so it won't change.
 
It boggles my mind that you don't see the inherent contradiction between

The Sicatoka said:
I believe people with more money spend it and it does good things for the whole economy.
Click to expand...

With this

I believe we're ignoring one entire side of the governmental budget equation, namely, spending.
Click to expand...

We need to spend because it helps the economy. But the government needs to stop spending. Durrr.

Less overhead for one.
Click to expand...

Not remotely true.


We'll never tax our way to prosperity (hasn't ever been done), and especially so when we can't stop spending* like sailors on shore leave.
Click to expand...

Funny how plenty of other places have, how the higher taxed states have relative to low tax states, and how this country used to do just 60-75 years ago.
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

That and this idea that the private sector and the average person is somehow that much more competent/efficient than government which has no basis in reality. Also the idea that people in the 1% spend the same percentage of their income/wealth as the average person is clearly false.
 
mookie1995 said:
so you REALLY carry more overhead than the government? Honest and for true???
Click to expand...

Social security has an overall overhead of 2%. If you limit it to just retirement, it's less than 1%.

Show me a private financial planner with 1% overhead.
 
unofan said:
Social security has an overall overhead of 2%. If you limit it to just retirement, it's less than 1%.

Show me a private financial planner with 1% overhead.
Click to expand...

Social security has no money. This isn’t Norway.

Let’s stick with reality please
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

The Sicatoka said:
I believe people with more money spend it and it does good things for the whole economy.
I believe people with their money make better spending decisions, including charity and goodwill, than government would with it. Why? Less overhead for one.
I believe we're ignoring one entire side of the governmental budget equation, namely, spending.

We'll never tax our way to prosperity (hasn't ever been done), and especially so when we can't stop spending* like sailors on shore leave.


*Politicians have to keep getting re-elected so it won't change.
Click to expand...

The spending decisions really depends on what you're trying to do with it. If you're spending to make yourself happy, then at least at the time of purchase, the decision is 100% popular. Once you start having to take into account the opinions of other, the popularity becomes much more diluted. I don't think there's going to be a single decision that will please 300 million people.

Also, I don't think we're ignoring spending so much as considering what should be on the table. Democrats don't want to put Social Security, Medicare, and other social programs on the table, as is evidenced by a 2015 graph set on "mandatory" vs. "discretionary" spending. MIC doesn't want to put defense spending on the table, for obvious reasons. I say put it all on the table with exception to anything that's in the Constitution, which includes the repayment of creditors.
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

mookie1995 said:
Mookie has never seen that assumption before 1 minute ago right here written by you
Click to expand...

Well it depends how Mookie interprets this

I believe people with more money spend it and it does good things for the whole economy.
Click to expand...
When three people who have 50% of the nation's wealth save at rate much higher than the average person it's not hard to understand why this is a problem in an economy where 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending.
 
Last edited:
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

trixR4kids said:
When three people who have 50% of the nation's wealth save at rate much higher than the average person it's not hard to understand why this is a problem in an economy where 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending.
Click to expand...

How would you spend, on average, 10 million per week?
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

mookie1995 said:
Social security has no money. This isn’t Norway.

Let’s stick with reality please
Click to expand...

Social Security has GOBS of money. Where do you think all the money for all the wars came from?
 
The Sicatoka said:
Is that part of our overall problem? How do we solve that (if it is a problem)?
Click to expand...

You're the one who espouses libertarian tendencies. It's kind of rich for you to even ask if all that private spending is bad.

Surely you're not asking for a larger share of government spending?
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

unofan said:
You're the one who espouses libertarian tendencies. It's kind of rich for you to even ask if all that private spending is bad.

Surely you're not asking for a larger share of government spending?
Click to expand...

OK, I did a poor job of asking the question.

So much consumer spending is on service based things and not "making stuff" (which tends to be better paying jobs). We've become a service economy, not a manufacturing economy.

How can we fix that.
 
The Sicatoka said:
OK, I did a poor job of asking the question.

So much consumer spending is on service based things and not "making stuff" (which tends to be better paying jobs). We've become a service economy, not a manufacturing economy.

How can we fix that.
Click to expand...

We're not going to. As robots make more and more of our stuff (remember, gross manufacturing output is as high as ever in this country, it just takes fewer people to do it) humans will be left with primarily service and entertainment jobs. That's not a bad thing in the aggregate, but it will require a fundamental restructuring of our entire way of thinking about things.
 
Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

I also like how “making things” doesn’t include food in a lot of people’s minds and people who work in that industry are very much underpaid compared to other blue collar jobs generally speaking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top