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.
So you want to shrink the money supply in a depressed economy?
Spend what we have. STOP borrowing.
Quote:
You don't have a clue if you did not understand that. You are like a child learning how to babble their first words. So please understand it or stop these ridiculous "debt threads".
As soon as YOU foot the bill for the half a trillion dollars we have to pay in interest on the national debt each year. Do we have a deal?
How much should we raise taxes on the wealthy? How much is enough? Should we take 75% of their income? Would that even be enough with the way the obama administration is spending money? We would have to cut a lot more than defense spending. obama is spending over 1 trillion dollars a year and there is no reason to think he will stop doing this. So, we would have to collect about $2 trillion each year from the wealthy to even begin to put a dent in the national debt. The top 1% earn about $2.5 trillion a year. We can not take all of their earnings. The problem with this socialist ideal is exactly what Margaret Thatcher said, "Eventually other people's money runs out". This whole idea of "let's just tax the rich more" does not make sense. Congress needs to pass a budget and obama needs to stop spending so much of our children's and granchildren's money. How Much Money Do the Rich Have? - By Robert VerBruggen - The Corner - National Review Online
They are not even being taxed, dear. Capital gains taxes are deferred unlike income taxes. They even borrow against them, never paying a tax.
To end this non sense all you need to to is tax economic rents which will have no impact on the goods and service economy. In fact we would have a production boom.
Wow, are you ever confused. You posted a link to an article about income, not assets. And furthermore, it's an "opinion" and an INCORRECT one, at that...
This number gets thrown around so often that it doesn't even seem real and has no shock value. It's like hearing about an embassy bombing in the middle east, just news of the day.
However, I think if middle America were more educated on what this meant to them on a PERSONAL level and how it will impact them and their future financially, more people would pay attention to why continuing to run this deficit is wrong. I think the Democrats have basically got everyone believing that a massive deficit is just the cost of doing business and there's not really any negative consequences to the 'individual' because it's government debt and 'they'll' (government) figure it out and get it taken care of in due time.
Right now it doesn't mean much...If interest rates go up it will mean a lot and it will be quite bad.
I think my generation (boomers) was barely comprehending what a "billion" meant, and then we moved so quickly into discussing "trillions." it just doesn't compute for most--- except that it means "a lot" of money.
Also, the fact that so many people are not really feeling a huge impact to their lives yet---it is happening as a slowly decaying quality of life, and we are so distracted with our hitech computer, phone, and texting gadgets that most (not all) are barely aware of the decline.
Spend what we have. STOP borrowing.
As soon as YOU foot the bill for the half a trillion dollars we have to pay in interest on the national debt each year. Do we have a deal?
Its babbling. I told you it would be. I said to read it and then get back to me. I told you the government does not borrow money. The government creates money by going into debt. Why do you keep repeating the same cliche' that is next to grandma's turpentine recipe for leg pain? Read it. Debunk it. Do whatever but don't you understand I rejected your premise. I realize the national debt is the money supply . It might be flawed but I can rip out the heart with the cancer.
Bush's TWO WARS and his economy left on the brink of Depression CAUSED a huge amount of this 5.3 Trillion increase.
No.
Obama's spending:
The second half of TARP that Obama requested for his bankster buddies, the Auto Bailout, The Mortgage/Loan Medication Program, The Omnibus Spending Bill signed by Obama March 2009, The Stimulus Bill, S-CHIP expansion, and much, much more...
And the economy was left on the brink of Depression because of the housing bubble and MBS debacle fueled by the Democrats' darlings, the CRA and the GSEs.
Fannie Mae's former chief credit officer knows how and why that happened...
Investors in GSE securities were led to believe that the vast majority of the loans backing these securities were low risk. Thanks to the SEC's investigation, the GSEs have, for the first time, acknowledged the magnitude of their efforts to mislead investors with regard the true nature of their exposure to subprime and Alt-A loans. Instead of $600 billion in subprime and Alt-A loans, the GSEs' credit guaranty portfolios contained $1.6 trillion. Thus approximately $1 trillion in subprime and Alt-A loans were misclassified. Given the GSEs' high leverage--each dollar of capital supported about $80 in debt--their insolvency was inevitable.
A default would have created panic. With the collateral backing the GSEs' securities being of unknown value and their corporate guarantees worthless, uncertainty as to the magnitude of losses would have contaminated the entire $5.4 trillion in outstanding GSE securities. Market values would likely have plummeted by 20% or more - creating losses of $1 trillion or more. Policy makers had encouraged investment in GSE securities by way of low capital requirements. As a result further insolvencies would have occurred as many investors in GSE securities were themselves highly leveraged...
This number gets thrown around so often that it doesn't even seem real and has no shock value. It's like hearing about an embassy bombing in the middle east, just news of the day.
However, I think if middle America were more educated on what this meant to them on a PERSONAL level and how it will impact them and their future financially, more people would pay attention to why continuing to run this deficit is wrong. I think the Democrats have basically got everyone believing that a massive deficit is just the cost of doing business and there's not really any negative consequences to the 'individual' because it's government debt and 'they'll' (government) figure it out and get it taken care of in due time.
its not stopping at 16 trillion no matter who we elect
False. The IRS reports that the top 0.1% pay an average effective federal income tax rate of 24.28% and the top 1% pay an average effective federal income tax rate of 24.01%. They are being taxed. IRS Effective Tax Rate Data
You clearly have NO CLUE what you're talking about, yet again.
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.
