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.
Hi guys,
I would of posted this in the presidential election thread, but I know that if I posted it there, there would be a lot of bickering and no real analytical analysis of each parties' plans. So I'm putting it here since the business, finance, investing posters tend to be better at presenting thoughtful analysis.
Or, if they both suck, what sustainable and sound economic policies do you think would bring America out of our current rut.
I didn't think they actually had plans. They just used buzzwords like 'anti-Bush' and 'Change'.
I think allowing businesses to expand creates more jobs. I like the idea of a flat tax on individuals and business. Stock dividends are already taxed twice I dont think it should be increased. I dont think a mandatory 2-3 years of military service would be all that bad of an idea. Big government is bad, because government rarely makes decisions on a timely basis.
A lot of the financial trouble in housing going on comes down to greed, and try as we might to legislate it there are too many who find loopholes. The (predatory) lenders are just as guilty as the (greeedy house flipping) borrowers. I am not a fan of govt bailouts but I am led to believe (baaaa baaaa) that its done to keep foreign investment stable. As if we crashed, there would be a huge domino effect on the global economy. (That leaves me to ask if the govt has that much spare cash, why cant we fix or bridges, and update the air control system...dont get me started on schools they get almost half the tax dollar already). I think a couple of the bad actors should have gone down in flames. Unfortunately we will spend lots of time passing new restraint rules just like the recordkeeping mess that is Sarbanes Oxley.
However we need to propose something that keeps more blue and white collar jobs here in the states. Its one thing when the extractable resources are in other parts of the world, but also need to get american kids in the technical schools. Too many senior level PhD jobs are going to foreign born students.
Perhaps retooling some of the silliness in the Clean Air act that prevents energy businesses from growing. Invest in Nukes, coal and alternative fuels. A big thing would be to have a nationalized fuel standard (or maybe 2).
From reading the link both are proposing bandaids to serious problems..not long term fixes.
What would be the direction for a more long term fix?
So far I think some of the main points are to induce American companies to invest here which should keep/create jobs, resolve some sort of energy solution, reduce the costs of excessive paper work legislation like the Sarbanes Oxley, use of funds more efficiently, and improve education levels.
Or, if they both suck, what sustainable and sound economic policies do you think would bring America out of our current rut.
My guess is the plan that induces more production, creates more jobs, and encourages savings would be the best for the Country.
I find it hard to reconcile Obama's promises of tax cuts, or further stimulus payments, and grandiose spending schemes.
I also think there is a distinction, especially in the case of Obama, between the candidate's plan and what the party in power will actually do: a democrat-controlled Congress would dominate Obama and dictate fiscal policy; i.e. raise taxes across the board for everybody.
Face it, the real agenda of the people in power right now, regardless of party (they're really the same), is to continue raiding the treasury, whether through rapacious redistributive monetary policy (the Bush administration policy) and/or rapacious redistributive fiscal policy (the intention of the would-be democratic majority in government in 2009-2013).
Right now the key to inducing more productivity (not necessarily more production), creating more jobs (and so more production as well), and encouraging saving (and so investment) is monetary policy reform.
Unfortunately, monetary policy reform is not on the agenda.
With Obama, I would expect high inflation, high taxes, zero or negative productivity growth, and hardly any real income growth for years to come for everybody. The positive, I suppose, is that we would all share the misery at a lower standard of living, while the negative is that the economy's competitiveness and potential for a recovery in productivity will be further eroded.
With McCain I would expect high inflation, about the same taxation, some productivity growth and some real income growth for a few more years, the ones doing the growing being those who are in the most productive jobs/businesses and who know how to dodge inflation. The negative, then, is that the rich will keep getting richer, but the economy's competitive position would erode at a slower pace and some basis would remain for a recovery going forward. In the current circumstances, that's the best we can hope for.
Once the treasury is depleted, and we are on the balls of our arse, then maybe the people in power will sober up and tackle the question of monetary policy reform, which really implies a cultural change or, perhaps more simply, a return to discipline.
I must say, the first article from yahoo was poorly written. The second was ok, but the author seems a bit foolish.
Anyway, taking these two men on face value; McCain and Obama. Here is what I see.
McCain doesn't seem to grasp that the F.I.R.E. economy is OVER. Doesn't seem to grasp the fundamentals of our fiat money system is on the brink of destruction. So therein lays a HUGE problem, failing to recognize there is a problem with the fundamentals. This is a huge negative for McCain in my eyes. Yes, he will have economic advisors; however what good is that when a candidate doesn’t understand the fundamentals. It wasn’t too long ago McCain was asked something concerning the economy and his response was that he didn’t fully understand it. That is a scary thought in my eyes. So basically with him we will be relying on so person in the background, and hoping that he knows what he is doing or that he isn’t on the take. The president should have some understanding of the fundamental issues. This way, when his advisor gives him advice he can make INTELLIGENT decisions based on this advice.
Both seem to get that petroleum moving forward is going to be a problem. But again, their approaches are like night and day and again show lack of understanding from Mcain. IF we hit peak oil or will be hitting peak oil by 2015 as many geologist have stated, we can no longer afford to rely just on petroleum. It seems to me like that’s McCain’s answer. Lets drill off shore and that will save the day. One article claimed that will shave PENNIES off a gallon of gas. Not much of a sensible solution.
Obama seems to grasp the problem more so and is pushing for alternative energy. This is smart because this will put us back on track as a producer of said alternative energy. Especially if that alternative energy is something like bio diesel, or some other such renewable source that we can produce at a cost and technological advantage. We could become a HUGE exporter of this with enough investment. This is also smart because the economy MUST be transitioned. We can no longer milk the F.I.R.E. economy; those days are gone, gone, gone. So, + 1 to Obama for trying to make us viable in the long run and providing jobs on this front. In all this, job creation is a must, and sustainable jobs at that. Bubble induced jobs are not sustainable. Tech bubble proved that, so did the finance bubble before it, and so did the R.E. bubble. Millions of jobs are lost to us never to return. This in turn means more bubbles must be produced to keep the economy going. This is DUMB growth and something we saw since the F.I.R.E. economy’s birth. They said since the tech bubble’s burst, it was the real estate field that produced the most job growth (since 2001). Sustainability not just in energy but in terms of economic policy should be the rule of the day. Obama seems to get this and unfortunately McCain doesn’t seem to speak much to this fact.
While on the economy, I like Obama's infrastructure initiatives. We have the infrastructure of a 3rd world country, as far as the infrastructures state of repair is concerned. We MUST invest in transportation, roads, mass transit. Obama has acknowledged this, and again peak oil will dictate that we MUST have these things. Given peak oil, plane travel is going to be cost prohibitive (it is already expensive and will most likely continue). So, mass transit, better regional planning, better urban planning, and stopping urban sprawl, these must be done. Then we must invest in local mass transit and then to tie cities together with heavy rail. Tie regions together with bullet trains. Again, this will make the difference between how successful we are moving forward. Peak oil means even with diminished demand, the oil supply of the world will still be out stripped by demand, leading to even higher prices. Instead of shipping goods via trucks, I think we will see a return to freight trains. It is far more cost effective for moving goods. There was a report recently where congress was looking at how to bring our freight train system up to speed; investing in double tracking etc. As I always say, when you want to know where things are headed, go look at what congress is looking at and what laws are being passed.
I also look Obama's high speed broad band subsidy. It was very sly, but I wish he would say why he is so big on this. I believe this is because of telecommuting. This is going to help us get through the transition. Not everyone is going to be able to afford a new car, so getting around is going to get harder. This is especially true given the heavy loss of jobs in this country right now. Couple that with the fact many cities do not have decent mass transit and I think a picture becomes clear. You will most likely see some incentives given to companies for allowing telecommuting. With that though, I think we will see a lot of commercial real estate crash and burn. So, if my thesis is right as to why Mr. Obama wants to do this, then plus 1 to him on that as well.
McCain is heavy Laissez Faire i.e. unfettered capitalism. This has been proven time and time again to NOT WORK. We are in the mess we are in now partly because of capitalism. Oversight was relaxed and markets were allowed to do whatever they liked. Now we face this country’s worst housing and economic crisis EVER. Govt MUST play a role in watching markets, and protecting the welfare of the nation. The problem is lobbyist, somehow this needs to be outlawed or something. Otherwise it will be more of the same in the long run.
Taxes will have to be increased by both candidates. I don’t see how much of what either is saying will be paid for. Well, they could always keep borrowing. In which case we don’t pay in taxes now, but we will have to pay later. I guess since people are generally short sighted and foolish that might be the better alternative politically. Taxes are not bad, they must be paid. You live in a country, yeah must give back to it, otherwise you are a parasite. The problem comes in when economic fundamentals are not in place. Example, we have high tax (example) yet cost of living is low and wages are high. Then I see no problem with high taxes as long as those taxes are being used to benefit the citizenry.
I am sure Mr. McCain’s plan isn’t as simple as it sounds. I hope when debate time comes he can flesh it out more. As it stands right now, he seems to lack any real understanding of what is going on right now. But then again that doesn’t stop people from voting for people like that. 85% of America is clueless as to what’s going on in our economy, how fiat money works, how the money supply grows or what is wrong with our economy. Average person is walking around foolishly thinking this is just another down turn. I hope people take time to educate themselves of the exact issues. How all this works and what needs to be done. I always want to see who ever gets into office have a REAL convo with the people. Tell them “hey we screwed up, we have a F.I.R.E. economy and a debt driven monetary system. This is what we need to do to fix it, it’s going to be LONG hard road and it will likely take more than one term, but we can get there” If they have the guts to have that conversation with the people of this nation, then I think we will be on the right track.
Oh lastly, I like Obama’s incentive to get people to save more. I don’t think I need to type more on why that is important.
McCain is heavy Laissez Faire i.e. unfettered capitalism. This has been proven time and time again to NOT WORK. We are in the mess we are in now partly because of capitalism. Oversight was relaxed and markets were allowed to do whatever they liked. Now we face this country’s worst housing and economic crisis EVER. Govt MUST play a role in watching markets, and protecting the welfare of the nation. The problem is lobbyist, somehow this needs to be outlawed or something. Otherwise it will be more of the same in the long run.
No we are in the mess we are because the govt is too big to be efficient. People are also sheep and want to be promosed that the govt will take care of them forever. If any politcian ever mentioned personal responibility they would be thrown out of office. Idiots bought houses they couldnt afford. Banks let them money because the entire banking system is a scam aided by the govt to create money out of thin air.
Taxes will have to be increased by both candidates. I don’t see how much of what either is saying will be paid for. Well, they could always keep borrowing. In which case we don’t pay in taxes now, but we will have to pay later. I guess since people are generally short sighted and foolish that might be the better alternative politically. Taxes are not bad, they must be paid. You live in a country, yeah must give back to it, otherwise you are a parasite. The problem comes in when economic fundamentals are not in place. Example, we have high tax (example) yet cost of living is low and wages are high. Then I see no problem with high taxes as long as those taxes are being used to benefit the citizenry.
We both know that this is a joke. they will not benefit the citizens. These taxes slow down the economy. almost all of the money collected is completely wasted. the other tax you fail to mention, inflation kills middle class people. but just keep printing money out of thin air,bail everyone out and basically put a bandaid on everything and think that it will hold forever.
Oh lastly, I like Obama’s incentive to get people to save more. I don’t think I need to type more on why that is important.
Yea and much like everything else obama says there is no actual plan behind his ideas. Save more-yea when your being taxed more and inflation is thru the roof.
As it stands right now, he seems to lack any real understanding of what is going on right now. But then again that doesn’t stop people from voting for people like that. 85% of America is clueless as to what’s going on in our economy, how fiat money works, how the money supply grows or what is wrong with our economy. Average person is walking around foolishly thinking this is just another down turn. I hope people take time to educate themselves of the exact issues. How all this works and what needs to be done. I always want to see who ever gets into office have a REAL convo with the people. Tell them “hey we screwed up, we have a F.I.R.E. economy and a debt driven monetary system. This is what we need to do to fix it, it’s going to be LONG hard road and it will likely take more than one term, but we can get there” If they have the guts to have that conversation with the people of this nation, then I think we will be on the right track.
Wow, this is so dead on i have no idea how you made your previous comments.
I still can't figure out how Obama would make his economic plan work. He's calling for hundreds of billions of dollars in gov't spending for healthcare, education and other government assistance. On top of that, he wants $150 billion to go toward alternative energy research. That part, I understand.
Here's the part that loses me every single time: he claims that he's going to cut taxes for everyone. Someone explain to me how he's going to cut government revenue (read: taxes) AND increase spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. Oh, and don't forget that he's going to get the Federal budget back in line at the same time.
I still can't figure out how Obama would make his economic plan work. He's calling for hundreds of billions of dollars in gov't spending for healthcare, education and other government assistance. On top of that, he wants $150 billion to go toward alternative energy research. That part, I understand.
Here's the part that loses me every single time: he claims that he's going to cut taxes for everyone. Someone explain to me how he's going to cut government revenue (read: taxes) AND increase spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. Oh, and don't forget that he's going to get the Federal budget back in line at the same time.
think debt.
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.
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.
