U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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 12-13-2012, 10:35 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
26,247 posts, read 44,012,358 times
Reputation: 29857

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977 View Post
... Tax cuts for the super rich-that is the Conservatives plan for economy. ....
Not really, it is truly a MUCH bigger picture. I am a VERY typical prudent and not wealthy USA business owner and I work with the financial conditions of my peers daily. The tax and reporting burdens in USA, coupled with the change in internet commerce and worldwide business providers are driving ALL USA commerce to seek a new means of profitability. It is NOT the super rich that benefit. They will survive regardless. The average 'on-a-thread' USA business will tank. And U and I will suffer.

This is not pretty, nor is it about the 1%. 100% of USA will suffer additional burdens, and the normally successful will perish. (majority !)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-13-2012, 11:12 AM
 
9,982 posts, read 7,261,841 times
Reputation: 5625
What I see happening is an approaching deep devaluation of all
banker-sponsored currency script. Notice I don't say "fiat" currency,
because neither the US dollar nor the Euro are fiat currencies.
They are banker-generated currencies, not government-generated.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2012, 12:45 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,129,178 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
Not really, it is truly a MUCH bigger picture. I am a VERY typical prudent and not wealthy USA business owner and I work with the financial conditions of my peers daily. The tax and reporting burdens in USA, coupled with the change in internet commerce and worldwide business providers are driving ALL USA commerce to seek a new means of profitability. It is NOT the super rich that benefit. They will survive regardless. The average 'on-a-thread' USA business will tank. And U and I will suffer.

This is not pretty, nor is it about the 1%. 100% of USA will suffer additional burdens, and the normally successful will perish. (majority !)
Going off this platform, if current trends in the upward distribution of wealth and the false idolization of the wealthy as "job creators" persist, the middle class, which actually fuels the economy and job creation, will continue to shrink, thereby increasing pressure on the safety nets in the US, while starving government investment in the future (ie, current infrastructure, education, health care).

Ironically, the demonization of socialized programs shrinks the numbers (ie, the middle class) who aren't reliant on them (ie, public primary and secondary education, SSDI, medicaid), in full or in part, while increasing the number of those who are reliant (ie, the poor).

Saying "if current trends persist" is pretty much the only kind of relative accurate predictions one can make about the economy, for reasons I noted previously.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2012, 01:23 PM
 
2,988 posts, read 3,755,299 times
Reputation: 4249
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
The winners-and-losers view doesn't do free trade justice. It isn't zero-sum, for one, so free trade doesn't, in and of itself, produce "losers" from an objective standpoint.
Oh, my, but it certainly does as it is actually practiced. Talk to some North Carolina textile workers, for example. The theory that everyone benefits and nobody is worse off (i.e., a Pareto improvement) from free trade depends on using part of the generated surplus to compensate the losers.

Last edited by Hamish Forbes; 12-13-2012 at 01:35 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2012, 01:25 PM
 
2,988 posts, read 3,755,299 times
Reputation: 4249
Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977 View Post
If they are not "our" corporations and no loyalty towards US, then why do we keep on focusing on giving them more and more tax breaks as they are neither bringing any profits in US nor creating any jobs.
It's easy when you actually own a couple of Congressmen or a Senator!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2012, 01:53 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,129,178 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamish Forbes View Post
Oh, my, but it certainly does as it is actually practiced. Talk to some North Carolina textile workers, for example. The theory that everyone benefits and nobody is worse off (i.e., a Pareto improvement) from free trade depends on using part of the generated surplus to compensate the losers.
You're right in that the situation is increasingly muddy the closer to the individual level you look. That's a problem with implementation by policymakers rather than with the theory. But, the US is better as a whole because of free (free-ish) trade.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2012, 08:18 PM
 
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
335 posts, read 296,262 times
Reputation: 195
The Buddhists teach us that all things change; things are born, they prosper, and they die. We must expect this.

This applies to our work and our employer. We must constantly keep ourselves current and able to adjust. Industries become obsolete, better run or better financed competitors come on the scene, and, of course, foreign competition can happen.

It is a fools paradise to think that you or your union can arrange for permanent, safe, lifetime job security. There can be no such thing. Even the teachers' union is having to realize this.

Besides, an industry where there is such security is signing its own death certificate. It will encrust with added layers of procedure, with sinecures, with unjust advantages over the general public, which will get noticed, and with declining performance, which will also get noticed. Competition is what keeps businesses under pressure to avoid this stuff.

When people are displaced by economic change, it must be understood that they must mainly take care of themselves. Temporary help in the form of unemployment insurance, some retraining and relocation assistance, and so on, are usually appropriate, so long as it is understood that the help is temporary.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2012, 02:07 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
2,884 posts, read 5,363,133 times
Reputation: 2742
I would say a relative, gradual decline.

-The post WWII era for the US (from the late 40's, early 50's to the 80's) was a historic anomaly IMO. Germany, Japan, Europe was wrecked. The US was the only kid on the playground with the marbles.

-The dollar game since the 70's is closer to an end than a beginning. Bretton Woods, the whole money management system is closer to an end than a beginning.

I wouldn't be surprised in 20 years if we're closer to Argentina or Brazil. Look at the projected budget numbers for 2020.

Look at the percent of the budget spent on entitlements. Between entitlements, interest payments on the debt, and the military....whats left in 10 or 15 years? Not much.

The budget numbers, deficit, fiscal outlook isn't very good for a 1st world country. People in this country have been completely myopic to the dollar standard. That's certainly in relative decline. Who's going to be holding dollars in 20 years?

-I wonder where the tax base is going to come from in 20 or 30 years. How can you have highschools producing....20, 25% dropouts, mediocre test scores, kids who can't pass basic history....yet they are suppose to support the country in 20 years?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2012, 03:42 AM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
7,876 posts, read 11,595,740 times
Reputation: 7667
Quote:
Originally Posted by John23 View Post
I would say a relative, gradual decline.

-The post WWII era for the US (from the late 40's, early 50's to the 80's) was a historic anomaly IMO. Germany, Japan, Europe was wrecked. The US was the only kid on the playground with the marbles.

-The dollar game since the 70's is closer to an end than a beginning. Bretton Woods, the whole money management system is closer to an end than a beginning.

I wouldn't be surprised in 20 years if we're closer to Argentina or Brazil. Look at the projected budget numbers for 2020.

Look at the percent of the budget spent on entitlements. Between entitlements, interest payments on the debt, and the military....whats left in 10 or 15 years? Not much.

The budget numbers, deficit, fiscal outlook isn't very good for a 1st world country. People in this country have been completely myopic to the dollar standard. That's certainly in relative decline. Who's going to be holding dollars in 20 years?

-I wonder where the tax base is going to come from in 20 or 30 years. How can you have highschools producing....20, 25% dropouts, mediocre test scores, kids who can't pass basic history....yet they are suppose to support the country in 20 years?
The sovereign nation-states of yesteryear will be provinces of competing global bodies corporate, e.g. either fascism lite with little social violence or fascism heavy for those who step across a certain line.

Okay, so high marginal tax rates, but riddled with loopholes, you can begin to see the silhouette of the next illusion.

Good Luck!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2012, 07:25 AM
 
8,277 posts, read 6,667,233 times
Reputation: 12070
Quote:
Originally Posted by bale002 View Post
Please do not view economics through the prism of petty partisan politics in this forum, please save it for the one specifically dedicated to that particular brand of idiocy.
I understand your opinion and the desire to keep economics and politics separate as much as possible. That said, it's not a realistic expectation. Considering that politics is sometimes defined as "the process of who gets what, when and how" and economics is the study of the production, consumption, and transfer scarce goods, it's nearly impossible to separate the two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John23 View Post
I would say a relative, gradual decline.

-The post WWII era for the US (from the late 40's, early 50's to the 80's) was a historic anomaly IMO. Germany, Japan, Europe was wrecked. The US was the only kid on the playground with the marbles.

-The dollar game since the 70's is closer to an end than a beginning. Bretton Woods, the whole money management system is closer to an end than a beginning.

I wouldn't be surprised in 20 years if we're closer to Argentina or Brazil. Look at the projected budget numbers for 2020.

Look at the percent of the budget spent on entitlements. Between entitlements, interest payments on the debt, and the military....whats left in 10 or 15 years? Not much.

The budget numbers, deficit, fiscal outlook isn't very good for a 1st world country. People in this country have been completely myopic to the dollar standard. That's certainly in relative decline. Who's going to be holding dollars in 20 years?

-I wonder where the tax base is going to come from in 20 or 30 years. How can you have highschools producing....20, 25% dropouts, mediocre test scores, kids who can't pass basic history....yet they are suppose to support the country in 20 years?
Excellent post John. You succinctly summarized my view which is that our government will ensure that our government doesn't collapse quickly, but it will be allowed to decline over time. On a day to day basis that decline will probably be imperceptible, but looking at the economy over years or decades it will be obvious what happened. Someone brought up that the quality of life in the UK is pretty good, but I would categorize it more as mediocre. Read the UK newspapers and The Economist and it is fairly clear that the UK has a flat or stagnant economy that is only marginally more healthy (in terms of growth) than Japan's.

Also, your point about the American economy after WWII is excellent. We were the economic powerhouse at that time not because of unions, the ingenuity of management, the superior nature of the American worker or for any other reason than the one you mentioned. We were on top because the rest of the industrialized world was destroyed. It's also worth pointing out that the industrialized world in 1945 or 1950 was much smaller than it is today. Japan was only partially industrialized and places like South Korea, Taiwan, India, etc. were still agrarian.
Rate this post positively 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 > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top