U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-24-2019, 01:39 AM
 
Location: Texas
27,513 posts, read 11,587,257 times
Reputation: 6388

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
Nothing to do with consuming? How do we get a trade deficit then? Other nations are producing and we are consuming what they produce a LOT more than other countries are consuming what we produce to make up the difference. When a nation run a trade deficit, in monetary metrics, we are sending our monies to create jobs and income to other nation. If we, theoretically, just produced what we consumed as a nation.....we would not need to import the difference and we would not be sending our money to other countries. Its hard to stimulate the economy via tax cuts.....because a big chunk of the extra money goes to purchase foreign produced goods....creating more jobs and income oversees than at home. The velocity of money is reduced by large trade deficits.
So according to you the only countries that have a strong economy are those who have positive trade numbers? That's the litmus test? So nations that have a negative trade deficit do not have a good economy? Inflation doesn't matter? Quality and availability of goods purchased doesn't matter?
So if we use tariffs that would make us consume domestic products and the economy would be better? So bring back Smoot-Hawley?

"Typically a trade surplus indicates a sign of economic success and a trade deficit indicates an economic weakness. However, if that were true, then the top four, China, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Russia, would be considered the best performing countries in the world. However, this would mean that the United States, Great Britain, India and Japan would be among the weakest nations considering that they are four countries with the highest trade deficit. In fact, they are leading industrial nations. "

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...trade-surplus/

lol you really don't get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
You are looking at the economy through politics of taxing and spending by the government only. Maybe that is all you know about economics....taxing and spending.
That's called the free market. That's what matters. You really are ignorant on economics. lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
Yet, you are trying to tell another poster that they don't understand economics.
Because you don't, When you prattle on and present no facts, which is your MO, you have no credibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
Taxing and spending are only government tools to try to stimulate or cool down an economy. They don't represent "The Economy". You have one track thinking.
I didn't say that, you did. That's something you made up because you are ignorant on the subject. Like how Nixon ended the gold standard. lol Amateurish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
TEverything you say is going to be taxing and spending as the root of the economic issues.......just like everything boils down to single parent homes for social issues to you.
That's just something you've made you up because you don't have much knowledge on this subject. In you entire babbling post you never presented any examples to back your drivel up. Not one. Why believe you when you've been wrong on so much?

Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 08-24-2019 at 02:01 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2019, 01:43 AM
 
Location: Texas
27,513 posts, read 11,587,257 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
He was heavily criticized for extending the Bush tax cuts twice, he was also criticized by the GOP for not cutting spending maybe you weren't around in 2013. But I don't see how you criticize a president who inherited a recession or a depression. Its probably not a good time to cut spending when you have an unemployment rate around 10% with bank foreclosures and companies going broke. Trump just did a Reagan, he increased defense spending and cut taxes and as if that's not bad enough he wants to cup payroll and capital gains taxes.
Yet we got out of a mini depression in the early 1920s by doing just that. Spending and taxes were cut 40% over 2 years time and UE went from 12% to under 4%.

Clinton helped spur the economy by cutting capital gains tax.

lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 01:47 AM
 
Location: New York Area
16,781 posts, read 6,635,999 times
Reputation: 12909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Yet we got out of a mini depression in the early 1920s by doing just that. Spending and taxes were cut 40% over 2 years time and UE went from 12% to under 4%.

Clinton helped spur the economy by cutting capital gains tax.

lol
Good historical analysis. Unfortunately the 1920's did not end well but that can be chalked up to other factors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 01:48 AM
 
Location: Texas
27,513 posts, read 11,587,257 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
Productivity is an issue also. With the rise of productivity....do we even need as many workers as we used to? The auto industry of the US lost most of its jobs due to automation....and not jobs going oversees for production. Robotics and artificial intelligence will eventually make more and more jobs non human. When we reach the point of recursion, meaning robotics and AI can build robotics and AI, the need for human labor will be greatly reduced.
lol you really don't understand what you are talking about.
What will happen to the candle makers if we have electricity? The industrial age which automated manufacturing created jobs yet you think otherwise? lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
Right now....if we fully leveraged all the technology out there....many jobs would be eliminated.
Yet you have no proof. Quit making things up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
However, the economic model is that people need to work to earn money to spend and in turn that creates demand to build and provide goods and services. In other words, if we eliminate workers for "robots"....who is going to be doing the spending to create the demand for the need of robots?
Why sure robots will be doing everything for us right? Make something else up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
A big factor that has allowed modernity is cheap energy. When we start experiencing resource deprivation.....on top of all the other negative signs........things don't look promising in the future...unless we create some new revolutionary technology.
So electricity is the main factor of a good economy now? lol Make up your mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2019, 01:49 AM
 
Location: Texas
27,513 posts, read 11,587,257 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Good historical analysis. Unfortunately the 1920's did not end well but that can be chalked up to other factors.
Yep and it's the same thing that caused the dot com bubble and the housing bubble. Easy lending which creates the mal investment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2019, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
2,481 posts, read 2,116,548 times
Reputation: 468
Both stopped talking about it because it's too far gone..they' are both to blame for it. It's going to take a miracle to first create a balanced budget so that there's no longer a deficit each year to add to the debt. Then you're going to have to come up with a sozable surplus so that you can make a dent in the debt which will still continue to increase just from the interest.

Back in the 90's they had a small surplus when Newt was speaker and Clinton was president. I think the first couple of years with Obama he submitted his idea of a budget to the House and both party's voted against it a 100%.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Politics and Other Controversies
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 · Bug Bounty

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