U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 08:34 AM
 
1,341 posts, read 295,371 times
Reputation: 2272

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
I'd like to think so. However, the current administration has made a series of blunders that will have huge economic impact in the next few years, even if the next one corrects many of them. The last few years were a time to make careful course corrections and set some important things in motion... and we got hack and slash and kick-down-the-road and an outright damaging tax revision.
You have that bass-ackward. The economic policies of the prior administration were disastrous. The prior administration viewed business as an necessary evil source of tax revenue rather than as the principle engine of economic prosperity. The current administration has been the best in modern history with respect to the economy, including recognizing that China has been engaged in economic warfare against us for decades.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
I tend to have a negative outlook
You've just been nominated for the 2019 Understatement of the Year Award.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 08:36 AM
 
1,341 posts, read 295,371 times
Reputation: 2272
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
This is pretty much my thought as well.

Our economy is propped up by various forms of debt. It's not really stable under the surface of things, and hasn't been for quite a long time.
Yet Occasion-Cortex says debt doesn't matter ("modern monetary theory") and hence we should borrow, borrow, borrow to hand out money, money, money to those who haven't earned it and don't deserve it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:51 AM
 
1,341 posts, read 295,371 times
Reputation: 2272
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
You apparently haven't read up on the various figures that make up that number......
Perhaps you prefer the Conference Board Index of Leading Economic Indicators (LEI). The LEI is comprised of the following 10 indicators:
  • Average weekly hours, manufacturing
  • Average weekly initial claims for unemployment insurance
  • Manufacturers’ new orders, consumer goods and materials
  • The ISMģ Index of New Orders
  • Manufacturers' new orders, nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft orders
  • Building permits, new private housing units
  • Stock prices, 500 common stocks
  • Leading Credit Index™
  • Interest rate spread, 10-year Treasury bonds less federal funds
  • Average consumer expectations for business conditions

The Conference Board also publishes the Conicident Economic Index (CEI) and the Lagging Economic Index (LAG).

The LEI is published monthly, the most recent one published April 18 https://www.conference-board.org/pdf...Apr%202019.pdf
  • The LEI for the U.S. increased 0.4 percent.
  • The CEI increased 0.1 percent.
  • The LAG increased 0.1 percent in March.

The prior month, published March 21:
  • The LEI for the U.S. increased 0.2 percent.
  • The CEI increased 0.2 percent.
  • The LAG remained unchanged in February.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:18 AM
 
1,341 posts, read 295,371 times
Reputation: 2272
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
On one hand you say the Government is not to blame - yet don't note that tens or hundreds of BILLIONS were given BY THE GOVERNMENT PURPOSELY to corporations...
Corporations do not pay taxes. People pay taxes. Corporations merely collect & forward taxes in the same way a retailer collects & forwards sales tax.

I realize you never studied economics - but since this is an economics forum, I'll try to help you understand.

One of the fundamental lessons of economics is that the entity that bears the statutory burden of a tax has nothing to do with where the burden of that tax ultimately falls. "Statutory burden" means the entity that by law must fill out a tax form & send it off to the IRS (when talking about the Federal Income Tax).

Any statutory burden of a tax on a corporation is allocated as follows:
  • X% is borne by customers in the form of prices higher than they otherwise would be
  • Y% is borne by employees in the form of total compensation (and hours worked) lower than they otherwise would be
  • Z% is borne by business owners (shareholders) in the form of profits lower than they otherwise would be
...where X+Y+Z=1.0 (that is, X%+Y%+Z%=100.0%)

Sooo... corporations merely collect & forward tax revenue to the IRS. The burden of that statutory tax is always allocated to a combination of customers, employees, and business owners (shareholders). To the extent a corporation is able to minimize a tax burden, that just means customers didn't have to pay a higher price, employees get paid more (and work more), and business owners (shareholders) make more profit.

There quite literally is no place else for the tax to flow: it must go to a combination of the three.

I may not of done the clearest job explaining this concept. If you didn't understand me, here are a few hyperlinks that you can follow to get more detail or perhaps a better explanation.

http://www.econport.org/content/hand...incidence.html
https://www.khanacademy.org/economic...-tax-incidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence
http://ase.tufts.edu/economics/papers/200607.pdf


The implication is clear: There was no handout to corporations, as corporations don't pay the tax to begin with (only people do).

Perhaps you dislike the idea of business owners keeping more of their profits... but remember who the primary shareholders of corporations are: public sector union pension plans. Regardless if we're talking about large Fortune 500 companies in aggregate, small Russell 2000 companies, or the aggregate of all publicly traded corporations in the Wilshire 5000, the majority of stock is owned by public sector union pension plans, private sector pension plans, individual savers via their 401K and IRA funds, and people saving for retirement or their kids' college educations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:42 AM
 
8,719 posts, read 3,819,088 times
Reputation: 1710
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
Yet Occasion-Cortex says debt doesn't matter ("modern monetary theory") and hence we should borrow, borrow, borrow to hand out money, money, money to those who haven't earned it and don't deserve it.
IMO the broad middle class needs a boost. Wage stagnation for decades. IMO they have earned it and deserve it. Deficits have gone to the rich. We need to direct them toward our middle class.

HC, infrastructure, education are 3 biggies.

Simply lowering Medicare to age 50-55 would be the easiest first move.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:44 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
6,508 posts, read 2,280,598 times
Reputation: 10133
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Pretty much anyone who's read enough of your posts knows your political ideology.
Really? Summarize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:11 AM
 
13,416 posts, read 3,576,495 times
Reputation: 10250
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
Yet Occasion-Cortex says debt doesn't matter ("modern monetary theory") and hence we should borrow, borrow, borrow to hand out money, money, money to those who haven't earned it and don't deserve it.
She is just as wrong as the King of Debt who believes the same.....other than the fact that the current admin feels the money should not go for solving problems, but instead to rich people and corporations.

But who do you expect more out of - a lowly young 2 year Rep or an entire POTUS Administration and their Congress (that passed the tax cuts, blew up the deficit, etc).

I often wonder - with good reason - whether most Americans watched the many episodes of Sesame Street which ingrained the basics of life...specifically

"one of these things is not like the other".

This is the very foundation of the current "know nothing whataboutism".

I ask you - as a person with "Rational" in their own self title, is $100 like $100,000? Is one of 438 quick come and go Reps the same as an entire Admin and actual laws costing 10's of trillions?

Surely you know the difference? What I "believe" or say means nothing in relation to actual things DONE or not done. Isn't this the basis of Rationalities?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:15 AM
 
13,416 posts, read 3,576,495 times
Reputation: 10250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
IMO the broad middle class needs a boost. Wage stagnation for decades. IMO they have earned it and deserve it. Deficits have gone to the rich. We need to direct them toward our middle class.

HC, infrastructure, education are 3 biggies.

Simply lowering Medicare to age 50-55 would be the easiest first move.
Can't do any of that without whittling down the Security State to size and raising taxes, something I (as a fairly big taxpayer) agree with heartily.

We are effectively choking ourselves.

I'd put quite a bit of stock in those who claim we are at "end stage capitalism" because the system does not scale. It was reliant on unlimited resources, cheap and slave labor and now...unlimited debt.

Only structural changes can possibly help this. The first among them is probably universal health coverage, which will free people up to innovate more and prosper. Infrastructure and education are big time.....

So, we are in agreement BUT, you cannot get there in small steps. Can't happen because all the separate forces working against this (Security State, Medical Corporations, etc.) won't let it happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
6,508 posts, read 2,280,598 times
Reputation: 10133
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
Skepticism regarding data isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Always suspect the data. Make those presenting it prove their basis for it. (On the simplest level, ignore any poll that doesn't fully explain the methodology, so that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can judge the conclusions's worth. On the other end, remain suspicious of data summaries that rely on more levels of cooked data than a haute-cuisine entree.)

Quote:
At the same time, I think focusing on the administration is not helpful.
What part of "I don't think it's a significant factor" did you misread? At most, government stats right now are being honestly generated using outdated formulas, with the unavoidable gloss of getting past senior officials who are so grossly incompetent and politically motivated that unpleasant truths get polished off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
America has kept its head in the sand about its economic problems for decades now. All we do is cut taxes and / or raise spending. But we never fix the underlying systemic problems.
Politically popular and expedient is usually at direct odds with necessity and importance. (And I do not confine this to the current administration, not by a long shot.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
You have that bass-ackward. The economic policies of the prior administration were disastrous. The prior administration viewed business as an necessary evil source of tax revenue rather than as the principle engine of economic prosperity. The current administration has been the best in modern history with respect to the economy, including recognizing that China has been engaged in economic warfare against us for decades.
Well... nothing really there to dispute except the underlying idea that the last admin was awrful and the current one is all sharp and savvy. Both are BS. There are far more forms of warfare than spewing tweets and issuing scads of useless and counterproductive tariffs, and I can't think of an administration in recent decades that hasn't worked to contain China's economic aggression.

Quote:
You've just been nominated for the 2019 Understatement of the Year Award.
Why, thanks. However, anyone who thinks I think I'm some mad positivist simply isn't paying attention, so even mockly-accusing me of a negative outlook just means you are.

We're facing some nasty crap in the next few decades, and most of it isn't even in the headlines yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
6,508 posts, read 2,280,598 times
Reputation: 10133
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
I'd put quite a bit of stock in those who claim we are at "end stage capitalism" because the system does not scale. It was reliant on unlimited resources, cheap and slave labor and now...unlimited debt.

Only structural changes can possibly help this.
Capitalism should and will survive. The doomcryers are those who benefited from the last 30 years of nearly cancerous, unchecked growth of capitalist practice, the result of as many decades of the right screaming about small government and deregulation and putting the all-holy Business! (may blessings and prosperity be upon it) ahead of every other concern.

Time to beat big C (capitalism, not cancer) back into its cage, where it's a useful economic basis and not some kind of pillaging invader. But yes, significant structural changes are needed, and soon to now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top