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.
I did not say debt can't buy debt. Your example shows debt CAN buy DEBT! I said that debt can not PAY BACK or PAY OFF debt.
It's true that you can buy products with the debt notes but those products are not owned by the people selling them. The pigs and the farms to produce that hot dog you paid for all have liens attached to them. They are not owned. You have a contractural right to use the liened products subject to you paying the taxes on the said products. The creditors own this country lock stock and barrel since 1933.
We have our wires crossed somewhere. If I hand someone a dollar I have retired a private debt with a government obligation. da guberment essentially cancels its debt when it collects taxes.
We have our wires crossed somewhere. If I hand someone a dollar I have retired a private debt with a government obligation. da guberment essentially cancels its debt when it collects taxes.
In order for you to have that dollar to pay your debt, someone else can not have a dollar to pay theirs.
There is always more debt outstanding than notes to pay them off. It's the nature of the sytem.
WE are the collateral for the debt. That's why every year when you pay your taxes, you owe them again the next year. It is perpetual. When you pay off your mortgage you still owe the property tax. No one will ever own that land. It's held in trust by the government or bank by the creditor who owns it. Which are the creditors who foreclosed on the U.S. in 1933.
In order for you to have that dollar to pay your debt, someone else can not have a dollar to pay theirs.
OK there we agree.
Quote:
There is always more debt outstanding than notes to pay them off. It's the nature of the sytem.
WE are the collateral for the debt. That's why every year when you pay your taxes, you owe them again the next year. It is perpetual. When you pay off your mortgage you still owe the property tax. No one will ever own that land. It's held in trust by the government or bank by the creditor who owns it. Which are the creditors who foreclosed on the U.S. in 1933.
I am fine with property taxes as revenue to da guberment. The creditors are trying to shift taxes off it so it rises in value which will command more mortgage interest. It we had a decent tax system we would never have had a bubble.
you keep posting the same discredited chart blaming tax cuts, as if you have no ability to learn from your previous mistakes, and you wont address how spending has gone up from $2.98T to $3.5T..
Why is that? Ignorance must be bliss
Excuse me, you are neither my professor nor my boss. Merely you saying that my facts are discredited doesn't make it so. My charts are based upon data and the conclusions from that data are indisputable. Yes, it is inconvenient that facts and data directly conflict with your ideological beliefs but as John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things; and what ever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they can not alter the state of facts, and evidence.”
They had a debt board at the RNC why not at the DNC? Aren't they as invested in decreasing the debt as well?
How would having a debt clock decrease the debt? The GOP had a debt clock to try to blame Obama for the debt, which they are at least as responsible for as he. It was a prop to make a bumper sticker point.
The question wasn't about why do taxes do what they do, the question was what number should we set taxes at to make the country grow? Just give me a number, obviously it must be a number lower than what Bush was able to do because Cons are asking for them to go even lower, so what is that magic number that will make the Cons happy?
I do apologize. I mis-read your post.
I support the national sales tax and eliminating the income tax, with a caveat. Once the rate is set, it would require a 2/3rds majority from both Houses to increase it.
Those that make more, spend more and they would be "contributing" more. Everyone should have some skin in the game.
With a sales tax even drug dealers, under the counter work and others who are not paying taxes now, will be paying taxes on their gold jewelry, cars etc. and every thing else they buy.
I support the national sales tax and eliminating the income tax, with a caveat. Once the rate is set, it would require a 2/3rds majority from both Houses to increase it.
Those that make more, spend more and they would be "contributing" more. Everyone should have some skin in the game.
With a sales tax even drug dealers, under the counter work and others who are not paying taxes now, will be paying taxes on their gold jewelry, cars etc. and every thing else they buy.
Modern economics began with Quesnay and the Physiocrats because of a problem. The same one you aim to cause.
The nobles and clergy were the privileged orders. They were exempt from such direct taxes as the taille, or land tax. Most taxes were paid by the Third Estate--a class that included peasants, artisans, merchants, and professional men. Even among these groups taxes were not equal. Some provinces were exempt from certain assessments, such as the gabelle, or salt tax. In addition, the collection of some taxes was made by contractors or tax farmers, and the tax gatherers collected whatever they could.
The third estate is what made goods and services. The other estates used wealth from their land possessions and made money with access charges.
Its revolting really. The whole field of economics was spawned from the very system which you want to see implemented again.
In fiscal matters, the Physiocrats famously pushed for their "single tax" on landed property -- l'impôt unique. According to Physiocrats, any tax levied throughout the economy will just passed from sector to sector until they fall upon the net product. As land is the only source of wealth, then the burden of all taxes ultimately bears down on the landowner. So instead of levying a complicated collection of scattered taxes (which are difficult to administer and can cause temporary distortions), it is most efficient to just go to the root and tax land rents directly.
They realized then they needed to shift taxes off goods and services and onto wealth creation with no production ie people who charge an access fee to something they didn't create like a ground rent. You need to tax wealth that is made by doing nothing.
And by not taxing the value out of land. It just goes to the new rentiers which are the banks.
Wealth is generated in the Productive Economy by the accumulation of equity value and in the FIRE Economy from economic rents and capital gains generated asset price inflation without an increase in value. Examples of asset price inflation periods in the US are technology stocks from 1998 to 2000 and residential and commercial real estate from 2002 to 2006. Over a period of decades the FIRE Economy has become a dominant source of income in the United States. The total sum of payments within the FIRE Economy are now many times larger than in the Productive Economy.
Last edited by gwynedd1; 09-07-2012 at 03:39 PM..
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.
How can I ask you a private question?
