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.
Federal spending and government programs created the robust growth after the Second World War and serves to create demand in times of recession when given the ability to succeed.
It creates CONSUMER demand which shifts the economy away from wealth production and harms EVERYONE.
Quote:
Demand must exist for economic activity to thrive...insufficient demand equals insufficient growth.
Demand is fueled by the production of WEALTH. You must first PRODUCE, in order to trade.
Quote:
In every instance of austerity we've seen since the Great Recession...recoveries have stalled....in instances of spending and stimulus...aggregate demand has increased. Just look at the metrics of jobless claims, GDP, and unemployment after the stimulus was enacted...all immediately trend upward. But I suppose that just another coincidence...
Because taxing and spending by government KILLS PRODUCTION OF WEALTH. It always hurts us. In the long run, government borrowing ends up causing loss of investment in production of wealth and it shifts the economy toward a "consumption" model, where everyone tries to earn a living by serving each other burgers and mowing each other's lawns.
Quote:
Now...all that said that doesn't mean that government isn't in need of reform. Medicare has the highest satisfaction rates amongst users of any healthcare insurer in this country and it commonly receives the lowest prices because it has a central negotiation unit. Further, it insures those that the private sector won't...prior to the ACA anyway and certainly more affordably. Medicare has delivered quality healthcare to seniors for decades. Now, Medicare is obviously in need of financial reform but that doesn't negate it's successes. Medicare, just like any private sector counterpart, needs periodic transitions and reforms to stay effective. We are at a juncture now where Medicare needs to be reformed...and it will be reformed and it will remain viable.
Wow, how can you be SO amazingly wrong - in EVERY aspect? Nothing you said above is true. Not one bit.
Quote:
NOAA is remarkably effective and it's technology has been responsible for preparedness efforts since it's inception. Same goes for the FBI, NSA, bls, and nasa...all have done great things to assist in their respective fields. On top of that and a little more localized, PBS....it has provided educational programming for children that may be from disadvantaged homes and may not otherwise get it and it has done so for decades and it does so affordably...PBS creates an infinitely small percentage of our budget.
There's no way to penetrate that level of self-delusion.
Quote:
But as I've maintained through all of this...your argument is just too easy. It assumes all the ability to blame government shortcomings but accepts none of the responsibility of governance....heads I win, tails you lose.
You don't even understand the argument. Here I thought it was ideological, and the fact is, you haven't the intellect to even comprehend the issues at stake.
There exists a more plausible argument to suggest that unfettered markets are more harmful than government could ever hope to be. The unregulated banking industry replete with collatalized debt obligation, credit default swaps, and derivatives effectively caused almost two trillion dollars to leave the economy in two weeks. The opinion the the U N R E G U L A T E D shadow banking sector was instrumental in the collapse is widely held and accepted amongst economists and analysts of the recession. Further, the bi-partisan FCIC agreed that the lack of regulation with CDO's and CDS' caused the financial woes that we see today. So while you argue with your thong in a bunch that the government is the woe and pain of the US economy and our government lacks the ability to chew gum and walk at the same time you need to objectively analyze what the all powerful and wise free market has given us.
It creates CONSUMER demand which shifts the economy away from wealth production and harms EVERYONE.
Demand is fueled by the production of WEALTH. You must first PRODUCE, in order to trade.
Let me ask you this. Suppose the federal government acknowledges, via NOAA information, that a particular high plain in the midwest receives an inordinate amount of wind. The government, in a continued effort to secure energy independence, comissions a proposal to build a wind farm with 100+ windmills and gridding infrastructure. Ok...Now say an independent contractor with X amount of wealth decides to comission a similar project in another part of the country with comparable wind energy potential...which he will subsequently "sell to the grid" of a local power company. Two contractors will each win the respective bids, subsequently hire crews, pay taxes on materials, complete the labor, pay the workers who will in turn spend their money...the contracting companies will then reap a profit after expenses are paid . The profit in this case would represent comparable numbers. The wealth of an indiviual or funding from the government will be comparable. The wind output will be the same assuming the research prior to is the same. And the net profit will be the same for the winning contractor. All will result in comparable tax revenues and all have resulted in the same level of demand for a wind farm. The ultimate point it that demand exists at all points for anything if capital is available for it's investment...the wealth created either goes to the backer of the project or the source of the capital tax payers through continued projects and decreased budget deficits once all the tax revenue runs it's course. The axiom is as follows...my spending is your wealth and your spending my wealth.
All that being said. I want it to be clear that I don't think the federal government's role is the be the source of demand for the economy itself. I don't believe in a centrally planned economy by any stretch of the imagination. I believe that the free market is the engine of economic growth and it only needs to regulated in so much that it protects private consumers. However, I do believe the government can step in during times of downturn to assist in increasing the aggregate demand of our economy which can make crisis much more acute and less painful.
Because taxing and spending by government KILLS PRODUCTION OF WEALTH. It always hurts us. In the long run, government borrowing ends up causing loss of investment in production of wealth and it shifts the economy toward a "consumption" model, where everyone tries to earn a living by serving each other burgers and mowing each other's lawns.
I'm not sure if you're intentionally or unintentionally basing your opinion on the Supply-Side axiom that every dollar of public expenditure forces out one dollar of private expenditure. That has been categorically proven false. So much so that supply side theory is a laughing stock of modern economics.
Wow, how can you be SO amazingly wrong - in EVERY aspect? Nothing you said above is true. Not one bit.
What specifically is wrong? That Medicare needs reformed? That it has insured seniors for decades? What exactly is so amazingly wrong? You can make sweeping generalizations with the rest of the them but when it comes to pinpointing ANYTHING you fall short EVERY time.
There's no way to penetrate that level of self-delusion.
I've been saying the same thing ever since you took it upon yourself to shove your unwanted opinion on my thread.
You don't even understand the argument. Here I thought it was ideological, and the fact is, you haven't the intellect to even comprehend the issues at stake.
I think that I do understand the argument quite well. I think it's you that doesn't understand the gravity of what you presume to understand. You've clearly demonstrated through this series of posts that you're an ideologically blinded puppy void of an origninal thought. But, there is a common theme with you. You don't really answer questions..at least not well. Your argumentative process is consistent at least...I'll give you that. It is as follows. 1). Make baseless claims that you can't back up. 2) Ignore relevant facts from opposing posters with senseless deflections. 3). Insult. 4). Rinse and repeat.
I've had a bit of a political epiphany as of late and I'm not sure if I know how to accurately label myself anymore. I feel like I've always sort of been a moderate Republican or a centrist...but I've been told from random people that I'm more to the right than a centrist but more left than a moderate Republican.
So here is what I think...lable what I am.
Taxes: I think we should have a flat tax at 25% with limited deductions. The capital gains taxes should remain at 15% to incentivize investment and capital risks. Corporate taxes at 25% as well...limit deductions and work to create regulatoins to manage off shore tax evasion.
Banking Regulation: Create stronger regulations to manage the shadow banking sector...CDS, CDO, Etc.
Ways to address recessions: Rebate checks to citizens. Put the money in the hands of the people. This is particularly useful when aimed at the poor because they are less-inclined to save these tax refunds...they will spend them which will stimulate growth. The Bush Admin issued tax vouchers which had a moderating effect on the early 2000's recession and made it much more acute than it would have been otherwise.
Military: Scale it WAY back. Do we really need to outspend practically every other nation thrice over? We need to scrutinize the military as hard as we scrutinize domestic programs for spending cuts.
Foreign Policy: Close as many overseas bases as possible, safely. Stay out of foreign affairs. Let the UN address these issues.
Healthcare: I've vascilated on this one a lot. I've read a lot lately on healthcare and based on my
experience with our healthcare system and the system I used while studying abroad in Austria (single-payer)....I prefer the Austrian system. Their taxation isn't remarkably higher than ours and their Ministry of Health is their central negotiation body and it is remarkably efficient with handling their costs. The healthcare system in Austria is remarkably efficient and succeeds at holding costs down far better than ours. So...based purely on my experience with these two systems only...I choose the Austrian one.
Social Issues: Pro drug legalization/taxation, pro gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-legalizatoin of prostitution. My basic premise is...if you ain't hurtin' anyone and each party is a willing and legal consentor...go for it.
Education: Tax vouchers for parents...empower parents to pick better schools than our failing public system. We've tried forcing money into this system for years...It isn't getting better and more money just isn't the answer. Parents should be able to opt out and use their "share" of the tax dollars for vouchers so that they can send their kids to the school of their choice.
Social Security: It should be means tested and serve as a true social insurance. There is no reason that wealthy people should pull from social security. If you don't need it...you don't get it. The eligibility age needs to be raised as well. We live longer these days.
Well, those are all the issues I can think about off hand. If you need more to accurately label me...ask and I'll try to address it.
I consider myself a democrat who leans progressive on social issues, but I found myself agreeing with you on several issues, so I guess we are both more centrist and sensible than many posters.
I've had a bit of a political epiphany as of late and I'm not sure if I know how to accurately label myself anymore. I feel like I've always sort of been a moderate Republican or a centrist...but I've been told from random people that I'm more to the right than a centrist but more left than a moderate Republican.
So here is what I think...lable what I am.
Taxes: I think we should have a flat tax at 25% with limited deductions. The capital gains taxes should remain at 15% to incentivize investment and capital risks. Corporate taxes at 25% as well...limit deductions and work to create regulatoins to manage off shore tax evasion.
Banking Regulation: Create stronger regulations to manage the shadow banking sector...CDS, CDO, Etc.
Ways to address recessions: Rebate checks to citizens. Put the money in the hands of the people. This is particularly useful when aimed at the poor because they are less-inclined to save these tax refunds...they will spend them which will stimulate growth. The Bush Admin issued tax vouchers which had a moderating effect on the early 2000's recession and made it much more acute than it would have been otherwise.
Military: Scale it WAY back. Do we really need to outspend practically every other nation thrice over? We need to scrutinize the military as hard as we scrutinize domestic programs for spending cuts.
Foreign Policy: Close as many overseas bases as possible, safely. Stay out of foreign affairs. Let the UN address these issues.
Healthcare: I've vascilated on this one a lot. I've read a lot lately on healthcare and based on my
experience with our healthcare system and the system I used while studying abroad in Austria (single-payer)....I prefer the Austrian system. Their taxation isn't remarkably higher than ours and their Ministry of Health is their central negotiation body and it is remarkably efficient with handling their costs. The healthcare system in Austria is remarkably efficient and succeeds at holding costs down far better than ours. So...based purely on my experience with these two systems only...I choose the Austrian one.
Social Issues: Pro drug legalization/taxation, pro gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-legalizatoin of prostitution. My basic premise is...if you ain't hurtin' anyone and each party is a willing and legal consentor...go for it.
Education: Tax vouchers for parents...empower parents to pick better schools than our failing public system. We've tried forcing money into this system for years...It isn't getting better and more money just isn't the answer. Parents should be able to opt out and use their "share" of the tax dollars for vouchers so that they can send their kids to the school of their choice.
Social Security: It should be means tested and serve as a true social insurance. There is no reason that wealthy people should pull from social security. If you don't need it...you don't get it. The eligibility age needs to be raised as well. We live longer these days.
Well, those are all the issues I can think about off hand. If you need more to accurately label me...ask and I'll try to address it.
The need to have others identify what you are tells me you are a liberal .
Wow! Thanks for your insight. One could only imagine how taxing it must have been for you to string together this rhetorical gem.
Now, with regards to my "studies." I've spent my four bachelor level years and one master level year studying actuarial science. I'm not sure if i'm accurately equipped to discuss all the inner workings of the government...but I do know money, risk, and how an organization forecasts properly...and I understand these things very well which help in understanding all these nice charts and budgets the government releases.
And one better...I'm going to go ahead and assume that you probably don't know you a** from a hole in the ground on "reasons for government" either. Do you expect me to believe that your some kind of Civics wizard that has descended from the heavens to come down here to a random web forum to bestow insight upon us heathens? Please.......Your posts are riddled with ignorance and petulance on par with a teenage girl in the middle of a vicious period. So take your little attitude and save for someone that cares.
I am center left as well and agree with most of your viewpoints except I think your flat tax is too much at 25%. I think 15% would be more than enough, or 10% across the board with a 1% national sales tax that can NEVER be raised.
I also agree with you immigration stance except I would add that we amend the constitution and enact citizenship rights that make it a requirement to have at least one American born (or naturalized) parent to be considered an American citizen. That would deny a lot of anchor baby families along with the rich Chinese who come over here to have babies then leave the country so in the future their kids can get financial aid and not have to be classified as international students.
Also, I would support limits on all social welfare programs, especially in the housing industry of which I am employed. I think there should be a 5 year limit on vouchers and that housing authorities and HUD should primarily support the private real estate industry in offering tax credits to developers to ensure quality affordable housing that will not be based on the voucher system - like Section 8. I also would support providing more government grants to private charities that provide emergency housing for people who maybe lose their jobs and then are facing homelessness.
In other words, you hold to the common sense viewpoint that the government's policies and its social welfare should work for their intended purposes.
Be careful around here with thoughts like those. You will be labeled as a heartless SOB who just wants people to die, if you ask the federal government to stop buying votes by lowering the bar to qualify, and stick to serving the people these social welfare programs were actually designed for.
I've had a bit of a political epiphany as of late and I'm not sure if I know how to accurately label myself anymore. I feel like I've always sort of been a moderate Republican or a centrist...but I've been told from random people that I'm more to the right than a centrist but more left than a moderate Republican.
So here is what I think...lable what I am.
Taxes: I think we should have a flat tax at 25% with limited deductions. The capital gains taxes should remain at 15% to incentivize investment and capital risks. Corporate taxes at 25% as well...limit deductions and work to create regulatoins to manage off shore tax evasion.
Banking Regulation: Create stronger regulations to manage the shadow banking sector...CDS, CDO, Etc.
Ways to address recessions: Rebate checks to citizens. Put the money in the hands of the people. This is particularly useful when aimed at the poor because they are less-inclined to save these tax refunds...they will spend them which will stimulate growth. The Bush Admin issued tax vouchers which had a moderating effect on the early 2000's recession and made it much more acute than it would have been otherwise.
Military: Scale it WAY back. Do we really need to outspend practically every other nation thrice over? We need to scrutinize the military as hard as we scrutinize domestic programs for spending cuts.
Foreign Policy: Close as many overseas bases as possible, safely. Stay out of foreign affairs. Let the UN address these issues.
Healthcare: I've vascilated on this one a lot. I've read a lot lately on healthcare and based on my
experience with our healthcare system and the system I used while studying abroad in Austria (single-payer)....I prefer the Austrian system. Their taxation isn't remarkably higher than ours and their Ministry of Health is their central negotiation body and it is remarkably efficient with handling their costs. The healthcare system in Austria is remarkably efficient and succeeds at holding costs down far better than ours. So...based purely on my experience with these two systems only...I choose the Austrian one.
Social Issues: Pro drug legalization/taxation, pro gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-legalizatoin of prostitution. My basic premise is...if you ain't hurtin' anyone and each party is a willing and legal consentor...go for it.
Education: Tax vouchers for parents...empower parents to pick better schools than our failing public system. We've tried forcing money into this system for years...It isn't getting better and more money just isn't the answer. Parents should be able to opt out and use their "share" of the tax dollars for vouchers so that they can send their kids to the school of their choice.
Social Security: It should be means tested and serve as a true social insurance. There is no reason that wealthy people should pull from social security. If you don't need it...you don't get it. The eligibility age needs to be raised as well. We live longer these days.
Well, those are all the issues I can think about off hand. If you need more to accurately label me...ask and I'll try to address it.
Overall I'd label you left of center due to your support of government-based programs, but your views on taxation are definitely Republican. Personally I do not favor a flat tax because it's regressive and I feel it would disproportionately impact the poor.
Any wage tax is left of center.
It was only supposed to be an income tax...know the difference.
Any government program that attempts to equalize any social inequality through money is left of center.
Federal Government doing anything but providing defense and dispute resolution between the states is left of center.
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.
