US dollar

[scroteface]

Does anyone also forsee this collapsing in the next 10 years? I've bee noticing a lot of voices calling for another world reserve currency, we have the ongoing debt crisis and growing numbers of foreign countries are signing huge trade agreements with china and others totally circumventing the USD. I know saddam and gaddafi had both tried to take gold as payment for oil before we killed them off, but we know this isn't a permanent solution and not something we can do indefinitely to save the currency.

1) do you think the dollar will collapse

2) when do you think it will happen

3) and what possible implications do you feel will come of it if so?

Post your thoughts here and why.

[2centsworth]

Does anyone also forsee this collapsing in the next 10 years? I've bee noticing a lot of voices calling for another world reserve currency, we have the ongoing debt crisis and growing numbers of foreign countries are signing huge trade agreements with china and others totally circumventing the USD. I know saddam and gaddafi had both tried to take gold as payment for oil before we killed them off, but we know this isn't a permanent solution and not something we can do indefinitely to save the currency.

1) do you think the dollar will collapse. If you mean will there be dollar revulsion, I say no. We are the largest most transparent economy in the world. That's not going to change any time soon.

2) when do you think it will happen. Why would any sovereign currency peg its value to gold? Totally unnecessary.

3) and what possible implications do you feel will come of it if so? Fear is a powerful selling emotion. I'm convinced all doomsday sayers have a hidden agenda.

[SnakeBoy]

I'm convinced all doomsday sayers have a hidden agenda.

Selling gold at inflated prices hasn't really been a hidden thing.


To the op, the dollar isn't going to collapse so there's really nothing to discuss.

[scroteface]

1) do you think the dollar will collapse. If you mean will there be dollar revulsion, I say no. We are the largest most transparent economy in the world. That's not going to change any time soon.

I do feel that a collapse is imminent. Right now as it stands, the dollar is the world reserve currency. Virtually all trade in the world goes through the USD, this is the way it has always been since Bretton Woods. This also means we get a scrape off of all world commerce since there is such a huge artificial demand for our currency in order for anyone to do business. OPEC sells oil strictly denominated in US dollars in exchange for protection of their oilfields. Any time anyone purchases oil, the driving force of world economy, they are propping up the USD.

For many years this has been a huge competitive advantage for us and allowed the US to avert financial hardship after even 30 years of bad decision making, sort of like our life vest. Our dollars are worth more in the international market because of this advantage, thus making imports cheaper. While enjoying this unfair advantage for so long, some countries feel that we are starting to abuse this privilege by rapidly expanding our monetary supply as some call it a pass to "print money" and borrowing way too much. historically whenever national debt approaches between 100-150% of gdp, currencies collapse. we're currently about at 100%. other countries are taking note and signing trade agreements with eachother, no longer seeing doing trade in dollars as something that is necessary. this lowers the demand for dollars in the international market to buy goods and lowers the value of the dollar. if congress doesn't get their act together and put together a real financial plan for solvency, everyone could "jump ship" all at once and go to say the yuan as a new global currency. there has been talk of this for years now.


2) when do you think it will happen. Why would any sovereign currency peg its value to gold? Totally unnecessary.

i see this happening when the US enters another major war with either Iran or Syria. Iran isn't Iraq in the sense that as costly as Iraq was, Iran would be 10 times worse. nothing but mountainous terrain made for defense and a much stronger military than the one we dismantled in weeks in 2001. such a crisis could set off an international panic and dumping of the dollar as our military would get exposed as it is spread too thin and weaker than people realize.

not sure what you're talking about with the gold part, i never said anything about a country pegging its currency to gold. i mentioned countries accepting gold as payment for oil, its the act of agreeing to do commerce in anything other than the US dollar that caused us to intervene. all world commerce must go through the USD in order for it to maintain its strength.


3) and what possible implications do you feel will come of it if so? Fear is a powerful selling emotion. I'm convinced all doomsday sayers have a hidden agenda.

your suspicion is right in this case, although it's not fear that drives me, it's opportunity. i forsee people seeing this as an opportunity to rid themselves of the oppressive US govt and a white nationalist movement sweeping across the south. as our military defense are weakened and spread too thin around the world, the homeland is more vulnerable than most realize. patriot groups are rising up across the south buying up guns and ammunition at record levels not seen since the years leading up to the civil war. this government has lost all legitimacy both at home and abroad, and without the massive amount of funding it requires to fund the world police machine, they would be brought to their knees in weeks. police and military have to be paid in order to fight, something that in the event of an economic collapse would be hard to do. millions of police and military would be laid off or defect. even sheep turn into wolves without food, tv, and entertainment. the tea party movement that we are seeing in many ways closely resembles the nazi parties beginnings in their rise to power. disenfranchised whites by the millions will see this as an opportunity to take back the country built on the sweat of their ancestors, being awoken to the myths and lies told by our government and fables about multiculturalism and "democracy." i forsee a return of the Confederacy and a strong white nationalistic southern state with a strong economy and limited immigration as our economy is taken back from the control of zionist nwo bankers and rightfully restored.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

As unstable as the dollar may seem I'll take it any day over the Yuan. The collapse of the US dollar likely means worldwide economic collapse and global anarchy, which I see occurring in the next 150 years. Well either be extinct, or the human population will be a fraction of what it is today 150 years from now.

Japan is the only country prepared for long term stability with a population that's shrinking every year while GDP also shrinks but GDP per capita remains stable. Economies that live and die by growth aren't gonna last very long past the year 2100, and that's a conservative estimate imo.

[Ignignokt]

That's right goys! purchase more US bonds.

[Chris]

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6095/z9uq.jpg

[scroteface]

chris brings up another interesting point, something i could potentially see coming out of this as well if the white revolution were to fail. in fact, this may be part of the plan to crash the dollar so that they can bring in the Amero as the "solution" to the problem that they themselves created. wouldn't shock me in the least, but they'll go through hell first if they're go succeed. you're talking about the bloodiest, most hate filled conflict maybe we've ever seen. the political divide is wider now in this country as it's ever been, northers hate southerners and vice versa. i'll be the first to admit that i don't like them yankees and they aren't my fellow countrymen. they'll have to kill me before i give up sovereignty to have open boarders and one currency.

[ElNono]

1) No

2) see 1)

3) Inflation, currency value liquidation, increase in competitiveness

[Rogue]

It's safe to say most countries nowadays would rather keep their wealth in the form of Euros rather than USD but I don't think the USD will "collapse" anytime soon. Countries are so closely tied to this currency that they won't be able to allow it to fail. Countries are all financially bonded and the hypothetical collapse of USD wouldn't do nary good to any country. Instead, it would be a financial disaster not only to US but also the rest of the whole world imho. No egg will survive under a nest wrecked

[angrydude]

Collapse? Highly unlikely. Too much of it used all over the world.

Devalued? Already been happening. Other currencies (like the yuan) will rise to compete.

Thing is most countries are also trying to devalue their currency. No one can tell the future.

You buy physical precious metals as a hedge against uncertainty, not as a speculative trade.

[HI-FI]

http://screenagekicks.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/framed193idiocracy8.jpg

[The Reckoning]

US has never defaulted on a loan

[CosmicCowboy]

US has never defaulted on a loan

No reason to when you can print money. That's why we are printing almost a trillion dollars a year right now.

[boutons_deux]

"No reason to when you can print money. That's why we are printing almost a trillion dollars a year right now."

and QE is going to the financial sector to finance their gambling, not into the Real Economy.

even with less income tax receipts due to high unemployed and low wages, federal deficit is decreasing.

"dollar collapse", "hyper inflation", "deficits matter (tell dickhead)" are nothing but right wing fear mongering, conning you assholes into their destructive austerity strategy.

[CosmicCowboy]

"No reason to when you can print money. That's why we are printing almost a trillion dollars a year right now."

and QE is going to the financial sector to finance their gambling, not into the Real Economy.

even with less income tax receipts due to high unemployed and low wages, federal deficit is decreasing.

"dollar collapse", "hyper inflation", "deficits matter (tell dickhead)" are nothing but right wing fear mongering, conning you assholes into their destructive austerity strategy.

:lmao

[boutons_deux]

Federal Deficit for 2012 Falls to $1.1 Trillion
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/business/federal-deficit-for-2012-fiscal-year-falls-to-1-1-trillion.html

[boutons_deux]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/10-10-12bud_rev2-28-13-f1-wide.jpg

the deficit is due almost completely to REPUG policies and actions.

[CosmicCowboy]

Only in Bouton's demented mind can debt rising by 1.1 Trillion be a decreasing deficit.

[Th'Pusher]

The federal budget deficit is decreasing and has been since 2009. The fact that there still is a budget deficit means that the federal debt is increasing.

[CosmicCowboy]

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2012/05/20120503_FedBudgEnt4.png

[CosmicCowboy]

It's decreasing only because TARP and QE have decreased. The trend is already established.

[boutons_deux]

Only in Bouton's demented mind can debt rising by 1.1 Trillion be a decreasing deficit.

the annual deficit is decreasing, or is the NY Times report lying?

[101A]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/10-10-12bud_rev2-28-13-f1-wide.jpg

the deficit is due almost completely to REPUG policies and actions.


The tax cuts "for the rich" were repealed, right?

So how are they such a huge portion of the excessive deficit? Also, how many times does Obama have to sign a tax cut before it becomes (at least partially) his?

I think we should call them the Kennedy tax cuts.

Also, we're out of Iraq, and leaving Afghanistan...I think your chart might be biased.

[boutons_deux]

The tax cuts "for the rich" were repealed, right?

??? WTF

the corps are paying the smallest %age of tax revenues going back many decades

dubya's estate tax cuts alone cost well over $1T so far. the shadow banking system, unregulated, increased hugely in the 2000s with so much cash floating around.

we aren't out of Iraq and Afghanistan, yet, and the costs of veteran health care/disabilitiy/benefits, re-equipping costs, etc go on for many decades.

[boutons_deux]

the annual deficit can be fixed, but all tax increases are blocked by the Repugs.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/10-10-12bud_rev2-28-13-f1-wide.jpg

the deficit is due almost completely to REPUG policies and actions.

:lol boutons. you continue to trot out that shitty cpp hit piece.

[tlongII]

Hey boutons, did you know that the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rates in the world?

[Th'Pusher]

Hey boutons, did you know that the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rates in the world?
Look at effective tax rates.

[boutons_deux]

Hey boutons, did you know that the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rates in the world?

false, effective tax rates are about 27%, just like other industrial countries.

[boutons_deux]

3 Biggest Lies Corporate Lobbyists Will Use to Push Lower Corporate Taxes

Lie #1: U.S. corporate tax rates are higher than the tax rates of other big economies. Wrong. After deductions and tax credits, the average corporate tax rate in the U.S. is lower (http://www.cfr.org/tax-policy/crs-international-corporate-tax-rate-comparisons-policy-implications/p27349). According to the Congressional Research Service, the United States has an effective corporate tax rate of 27.1%, compared to an average of 27.7% in the other large economies of the world.

Lie #2: U.S. corporations need lower taxes in order to make investments in new jobs. Wrong again. Corporations are sitting on almost $2 trillion of cash they don’t know what to do with. The 1000 largest U.S. corporations alone are hoarding almost $ 1 trillion (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323419604578573881623377200.html).

Rather than investing in expansion, they’re buying back their own stocks or raising dividends. They have no economic incentive to expand unless or until consumers want to buy more, but consumer spending is pinched because the middle class keeps shrinking and the median wage, adjusted for inflation, keeps dropping.

Lie #3: U.S. corporations need a tax break in order to be globally competitive. Baloney. The “competitiveness” of American corporations is becoming a meaningless term because most big U.S. corporations are no longer American companies at all. The biggest have been creating way more (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303990604577367881972648906.html) jobs abroad than in the U.S.

http://www.alternet.org/3-biggest-lies-corporate-lobbyists-will-use-push-lower-corporate-taxes

[TeyshaBlue]

false, effective tax rates are about 27%, just like other industrial countries.

Frankly, I'm surprised they normalize that high. I would've guessed in the 20% range.

[ElNono]

Only in Bouton's demented mind can debt rising by 1.1 Trillion be a decreasing deficit.


It's decreasing only because TARP and QE have decreased. The trend is already established.

Make up your mind, tbh...

Also QE and TARP have little to do with it... after all, QE was all the rage about 2010 (2nd round of QE was then, followed by two more rounds), and the federal deficit has been coming down since 2009.

There's a lot of more direct factors associated with this. (ie: banning of earmarks, sequestration, tax hike, etc).

[EVAY]

Back to the OP:

1. No.

2. Lots of people have been expecting it for years. The facts are that although the U.S. economy has certainly had its problems since 2007, it has weathered the storm of a near Depression better than any other country in the modern industrialized world.

3. The implications would/should be a total collapse of the world economic order. You have to remember that the U.S. came off the gold standard under Richard Nixon. And it was the proper decision at that time. But ever since then, the entire world financial and economic sectors are nothing more than socially constructed realities. The dollar is worth what the world agrees it is worth.


Politicians, economists and businessmen have all been wanting the U.S. dollar to become weaker than it was for a long time in order to improve our trade imbalance with other nations. This is one of the reasons the U.S. has been trying to get the Chinese to value the Yuan more...they want Chinese goods to be more expensive and American goods to be less expensive to help our manufacturing compete with Asian countries on amore equal footing.

[boutons_deux]

:lol boutons. you continue to trot out that shitty cpp hit piece.

TB :lol disprove it if you can

[TeyshaBlue]

TB :lol disprove it if you can

Again? lol simpleton Here's where the cbpp's methodology is completely destroyed. I posted this earlier. You'll ignore it now too like a good little moonbat.

http://politicalmathblog.com/?p=473

Enjoy the delicious sauce. the cbpp "analysis":lol is shit.

[TeyshaBlue]

Now run away like a little bitch like you did when I posted this the first time.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179807&p=5242733&viewfull=1#post5242733

[TeyshaBlue]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/daily_gifdump_20_zps7fc9ad5e.gif (http://s3.photobucket.com/user/teyshablue/media/daily_gifdump_20_zps7fc9ad5e.gif.html)

[boutons_deux]

he doesn't disprove anything

"The problem with this chart is that it implies that:


the economic downturn is Bush’s fault and will continue to be Bush’s fault
the tax cuts will extent into 2019 and they will be Bush’s fault
the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are Bush’s fault."

all true

"The problem with this analysis is that these tax cuts expire this year."

they didn't. they're still in effect.

"The President deals with the reality placed before him"

which is non-stop, from-day-one OBSTRUCTIONISM. That ACA got passed at all is a miracle.

"But by inheriting the house, the problems belong to the owner." :lol

holy shit, that right-wing article destroys nothing. :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

dumbass, why didn't they expire? It wasn't because Bush exteneded them.

lol simpleton. Keep reading. You might get it. Until then, runaway little bitch.

[TeyshaBlue]

"No one uses the “once cost and future interest” paradigm that they’re using here. Part of the reason if because, if we did, then the long term cost of every dollar we spend would be infinite, forever accumulating interest until we paid off the entire debt. This is clearly an absurd way of calculating the cost of any particular project… which is why we don’t do it that way." http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[angrydude]

false, effective tax rates are about 27%, just like other industrial countries.

Which is exactly why big multi-nationals have entire tax/accounting departments devoted to nothing but reorganizing their companies in order to get out of the US. Because its the same as everywhere else.

[boutons_deux]

Because its the same as everywhere else.

You Lie

the US's tax code is world-famous for its complexity, and 1000s of loopholes. Show the other industrial countries actual and effective tax rates.

[scroteface]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/04/Study-U-S-Debt-Obligations-70-Trillion

[Clipper Nation]

I don't know if a collapse is likely in the next decade, but people shouldn't just assume that the dollar will always be the world's reserve currency, tbh.... we've gone from being the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor in a matter of decades - when that happened to Great Britain, the sterling weakened and eventually collapsed and lost its reserve status....

[ElNono]

I don't know if a collapse is likely in the next decade, but people shouldn't just assume that the dollar will always be the world's reserve currency, tbh.... we've gone from being the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor in a matter of decades - when that happened to Great Britain, the sterling weakened and eventually collapsed and lost its reserve status....

But losing reserve status doesn't imply bankruptcy, and the sterling is just a good example of that seeing that along with the dollar and yen, it's the only other sovereign currency. There's no scenario where losing reserve status causes the US suddenly to be unable to pay it's domestic bills (ie: police, etc). The US doesn't have "external debt", that is, debt issued in foreign currency, thus it's in full control of it's currency and the reason the US cannot be "Greece"...

[CosmicCowboy]

But losing reserve status doesn't imply bankruptcy, and the sterling is just a good example of that seeing that along with the dollar and yen, it's the only other sovereign currency. There's no scenario where losing reserve status causes the US suddenly to be unable to pay it's domestic bills (ie: police, etc). The US doesn't have "external debt", that is, debt issued in foreign currency, thus it's in full control of it's currency and the reason the US cannot be "Greece"...

Are you contending that geometrically expanding deficits don't matter? Naturally we can always pay our debts when we can print all the funny money necessary. No one is arguing that. The question is what will that funny money be worth as far as purchasing goods and services and when will people finally lose faith in the funny money?

[CosmicCowboy]

You really don't have a problem with a 35 trillion dollar deficit in 20 years?

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2012/05/20120503_FedBudgEnt4.png

[boutons_deux]

You really don't have a problem with a 35 trillion dollar deficit in 20 years?

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2012/05/20120503_FedBudgEnt4.png

the chart shows $344B, not $344T.

the SS deficit is easily rectified by raising the cap to $1M on all income, not just earned income. Also, get the majority of 11M undoc immigrants contributing payroll taxes.

1% MINIMUM tax on all financial transactions.

Also, spending a few $T on infrastructure creation and maintenance would pay salaries

raising capital gains to 35%

closing the carried interest loophole

kill the wasteful Medicare Advantage

implement US govt as single-buyer for medicare/medicaid/military drug, device purchases, rather than the Repug rule that forces govt to buy without negotiation.

cut $200B/year off the MIC racket

etc, etc. There are LOTS of solutions to US debt AND economic stiumulus, but Repugs/VRWC will block them all.

[Cane]

All depends on the accountants and other shitty businessmen that run the USA. Wouldn't surprise me if those that got bailed out led us into another meltdown

[CosmicCowboy]

So Boutons answer is to raise taxes on everyone else. Figures.

[ChumpDumper]

m>s is infowars and stormfront mixed into a cheesy fondue.

[ElNono]

Are you contending that geometrically expanding deficits don't matter? Naturally we can always pay our debts when we can print all the funny money necessary. No one is arguing that. The question is what will that funny money be worth as far as purchasing goods and services and when will people finally lose faith in the funny money?

What matters depends on a plethora of factors and a good dose of futurology. What's our GDP going to look like in the future? What future laws are going to pass that will impact short and long term debt obligations? etc. You can go back and look at projections throughout the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush Jr years, and they no longer match reality.

There's clear economic indicators of "funny money" losing faith or value. None of which apply to the US dollar at this time. We have companies sitting on trillions of funny money because consumers rather accumulate the funny money than spend it. That's perhaps the strongest signal of confidence in funny money. Inflation levels in the US (especially compared to the rest of the world) have remained at historical levels.

Silly people get conned all the time with doomsayer fantasies, but the reality is there for everyone to see.

Now there's nothing wrong with hedging your bets and perhaps getting some metals, but going all in on the dollar collapsing is, IMO, crazy. There's simply no logical factors behind that.

[ElNono]

:lol Dumbass...344 Billion is 34.3 Trillion

really? :lol

1 trillion = 1000 billion (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071116001118AAQcrWd)

Hope you have an accountant doing your math...

[scott]

No reason to when you can print money. That's why we are printing almost a trillion dollars a year right now.

By what measure?

[CosmicCowboy]

By what measure?

What is it...80 billion a month on QE4?

[TeyshaBlue]

btw, since I didnt get to meet you saturday, if your Porter was a girl, I would've married it on the spot.

Very tasty brew.

[scott]

To be fair, I have a huge problem with a $35 trillion deficit in 20 years. Let's avoid that one.

[scott]

What is it...80 billion a month on QE4?

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/current/

[Wild Cobra]

To be fair, I have a huge problem with a $35 trillion deficit in 20 years. Let's avoid that one.
Then can we find a solution that liberals will accept?

[scott]

btw, since I didnt get to meet you saturday, if your Porter was a girl, I would've married it on the spot.

Very tasty brew.

Thanks - I just realized you guys had the GTG this past weekend. Unfortunately I was out of town at a speaking engagement. Glad you had a good time and no one killed anyone else! :)

[scott]

Then can we find a solution that liberals will accept?

What solution do you think is necessary to avoid a 10,000% increase in the projected federal deficit of 2035?

[TeyshaBlue]

Thanks - I just realized you guys had the GTG this past weekend. Unfortunately I was out of town at a speaking engagement. Glad you had a good time and no one killed anyone else! :)

A moment of silence for all those Porters I killed.........



































I love you, beer making dude!

[ElNono]

What solution do you think is necessary to avoid a 10,000% increase in the projected federal deficit of 2035?

:lol

[tlongII]

I can see you guys need to be educated about corporate taxes. smh

[scott]

I can see you guys need to be educated about corporate taxes. smh

Why don't you educate them? This seems like a good place. Make sure to reference your work please.

[TeyshaBlue]

:lol:lol

[CosmicCowboy]

A moment of silence for all those Porters I killed.........



































I love you, beer making dude!

Good thing the waitress was efficient at cleaning up the bodies. Between you and I it would have looked like a massacre.

[TeyshaBlue]

Why don't you educate them? This seems like a good place. Make sure to reference your work please.

This is gonna be great!

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/photopost/data/1561/deltaa277_1.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Then can we find a solution that liberals will accept?

liberals are tax and spend

Repugs are borrow and spend.

[2centsworth]

liberals are tax and spend

Repugs are borrow and spend.

wish it were that simple. On where to spend has always been the biggest bone of contention between parties. Taxing policy on the federal level is an economic regulator and not a source of funds.

[ChumpDumper]

I can see you guys need to be educated about corporate taxes. smh


Why don't you educate them? This seems like a good place. Make sure to reference your work please.We won't see him in this thread again.

[boutons_deux]

http://zfacts.com/sites/all/files/image/debt/US-national-debt-GDP.png

Repugs just hate the national debt they ran up, starving the beast with tax cuts, MIC spending, bullshit wars

[TeyshaBlue]

lol zfacts

http://www.justfacts.com/nationaldebt.basics.asp

[TeyshaBlue]

oooo...MIC spending doesn't agree with the moonbat. Imagine that.

http://www.justfacts.com/images/nationaldebt/expenditures_function-full.png

[CosmicCowboy]

Just wait until the blue line joins the red line.

[tlongII]

Why don't you educate them? This seems like a good place. Make sure to reference your work please.

Fuck no. I have no interest in walking through the logical flow of corporate tax calculations on here. I will only state that it's a fact that corporations pay a higher percent of income in taxes in the U.S. than in any other developed country in the world.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Fuck no. I have no interest in walking through the logical flow of corporate tax calculations on here. I will only state that it's a fact that corporations pay a higher percent of income in taxes in the U.S. than in any other developed country in the world.
What's the corporate share of total income in the US compared to other countries?

lol switching the lanes to intellectually dishonest arguments

[tlongII]

The problem exists with arcane tax laws. They do in fact provide corporations the ability to shift income to lower tax jurisdictions provided they meet certain requirements. The reason these exceptions to tax law exist is to try to even the playing field with other countries. It's difficult to compete if you are paying 42% of income in taxes while your competitor is paying 25-27% of income in taxes.

[Th'Pusher]

oooo...MIC spending doesn't agree with the moonbat. Imagine that.

http://www.justfacts.com/images/nationaldebt/expenditures_function-full.png

Would like to see some more granularity on Social Spending. Specifically the percentage of total spending for Social spending includes income security (Social Security, welfare, etc.), healthcare, education, housing, and recreation.

[ElNono]

lol zfacts

http://www.justfacts.com/nationaldebt.basics.asp

Well, justfacts doesn't really hide they're mostly conservative/libertarian in their viewpoints, tbh...

[Th'Pusher]

Well, justfacts doesn't really hide they're mostly conservative/libertarian in their viewpoints, tbh...

Yeah. I like the way they overlaid the impacts of the proposed Ryan budget. :lol

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm curious what they label social spending. Treating a worthless piece of shit soldier for PTSD because he was too much of a pussy to handle the war he voluntarily signed up for is defense spending, not social spending tbh since it's a cost incurred by the military.

[ElNono]

I'm curious what they label social spending. Treating a worthless piece of shit soldier for PTSD because he was too much of a pussy to handle the war he voluntarily signed up for is defense spending, not social spending tbh since it's a cost incurred by the military.

AFAIK, they do include military benefits under military spending (one would assume the VA is there). Now if the soldier does need foodstamps or housing assistance at some point, then that sure goes into social spending.

[TeyshaBlue]

Would like to see some more granularity on Social Spending. Specifically the percentage of total spending for Social spending includes income security (Social Security, welfare, etc.), healthcare, education, housing, and recreation.

Go to the link and click the detailed presentation....the data is there to peruse.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

AFAIK, they do include military benefits under military spending (one would assume the VA is there). Now if the soldier does need foodstamps or housing assistance at some point, then that sure goes into social spending.
:lol military personnel on food stamps
:lol "my military experience is going to get me a high paying job! Oh wait I'm on food stamps 10 years later!"

[ElNono]

The problem with stuff like this is that normally they cherry pick (and I'm talking about both zfacts and justfacts)...

For example, that graph Teysha posted is probably accurate, but what it doesn't tell you is that a lot of the financing for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were not part of the budget, so they don't really show up there.

[ElNono]

:lol military personnel on food stamps
:lol "my military experience is going to get me a high paying job! Oh wait I'm on food stamps 10 years later!"

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/07/13/dod-5000-military-families-losing-food-stamps.html
http://www.stripes.com/news/food-stamp-use-at-military-commissaries-up-sharply-in-four-years-1.160858

[Th'Pusher]

Go to the link and click the detailed presentation....the data is there to peruse.

I may be blind, but I am still not seeing it. I want to know what percentage of social spending goes to SS, Medicare, welfare, etc.

as I am sure was the author's intent, social spending looks scary, but Medicare and SS are contribution programs, not exactly the same as welfare and housing assistance...

[ChumpDumper]

Fuck no. I have no interest in walking through the logical flow of corporate tax calculations on here. I will only state that it's a fact that corporations pay a higher percent of income in taxes in the U.S. than in any other developed country in the world.Link your source.

[tlongII]

Link your source.

Google is your friend.

[scott]

http://businessroundtable.org/uploads/studies-reports/downloads/Effective_Tax_Rate_Study.pdf

[scott]

So your statement is technically incorrect, but let's not quibble over a couple of countries. The United States does, in fact, have one of the highest effective corporate tax rates of any industrialized country in the world.

Where on that list would you like to see the US fall? Would you support corporate tax reform that lowers effective tax rates but increases overall participation?

[ChumpDumper]

Google is your friend.And you are a failure.

[Wild Cobra]

What solution do you think is necessary to avoid a 10,000% increase in the projected federal deficit of 2035?

Stop subsidizing deadbeats.

[boutons_deux]

oooo...MIC spending doesn't agree with the moonbat. Imagine that.

http://www.justfacts.com/images/nationaldebt/expenditures_function-full.png

so you agree with the dubya/dickhead fraud of both Iraq and Afghanistan being paid for off the MIC books?

[TeyshaBlue]

I may be blind, but I am still not seeing it. I want to know what percentage of social spending goes to SS, Medicare, welfare, etc.

as I am sure was the author's intent, social spending looks scary, but Medicare and SS are contribution programs, not exactly the same as welfare and housing assistance...

In the first third of the detail page is a section called "Quantifying the National Debt". He goes into the components of SS, Medicare, etc..and it looks like he's trying to net the balance of funded/unfunded and using the net as a component of "social spending".

The footnotes below the chart titled "Federal Government Current Expenditures by Function" contains the following footnote: † Social spending includes income security (Social Security, welfare, etc.), healthcare, education, housing, and recreation.

[TeyshaBlue]

so you agree with the dubya/dickhead fraud of both Iraq and Afghanistan being paid for off the MIC books?

I agree that you have no idea what you just said, nor could you back it up if you did.

[tlongII]

And you are a failure.

Chump with the big Fail Whale.


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- On Sunday, the United States gets a distinction no nation wants -- the world's highest corporate tax rate.

Japan, which currently has the highest rate in the world -- a 39.8% rate on business income between national and local taxes -- cuts its rate to 36.8% as of April 1. The U.S. rate stands at 39.2% when both federal and state rates are included.


http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxes/corporate-taxes/index.htm

[TeyshaBlue]

In the first third of the detail page is a section called "Quantifying the National Debt". He goes into the components of SS, Medicare, etc..and it looks like he's trying to net the balance of funded/unfunded and using the net as a component of "social spending".

The footnotes below the chart titled "Federal Government Current Expenditures by Function" contains the following footnote: † Social spending includes income security (Social Security, welfare, etc.), healthcare, education, housing, and recreation.

*edit* Rats. Just re-read your question. It looks like if you want that level of granularity, you'll have to request the data tables from him which he states he will provide upon request. I might just do that.

[boutons_deux]

I agree that you have no idea what you just said, nor could you back it up if you did.

the official MIC budget "national defense" excludes the $2T+ costs, to be increaed by $100Bs in vet care, of the Repugs' two phony wars, which were financed by increasing the national debt.

[TeyshaBlue]

Let's see a cite for the 2T figure and the associated $100B increases in vet care.

[TeyshaBlue]

This is what a cite looks like:

"Potential Costs to Treat All VA Enrollees
Under Scenario 1, CBO estimates that total enrollment would grow from 8.0 million in 2009 to more than 8.8 million by 2016—an increase of about 10 percent—but would edge down to 8.7 million in 2020. The resources required to treat all enrolled veterans would be about $69 billion in 2020, nearly 45 percent higher than the $48 billion that has been provided for 2010.

Under Scenario 2, enrollment would be 620,000 higher in 2020 than in Scenario 1, with 340,000 new enrollees resulting from VA’s further relaxation of the restrictions on enrollment and 280,000 from the higher troop deployments. The resources required to treat all enrolled veterans would reach nearly $85 billion in 2020, or 22 percent more than under Scenario 1 and about 75 percent more than the amount provided for 2010."


http://www.cbo.gov/publication/21773

[The Reckoning]

legalize the herb and all of our problems will go *poof*

[Drachen]

Thanks - I just realized you guys had the GTG this past weekend. Unfortunately I was out of town at a speaking engagement. Glad you had a good time and no one killed anyone else! :)

My favorite that I tried was the old Blanco ipa. I was curious, though, where do you get your music? Is it an xm station or a play list. Every song was a good song. I kept thinking to myself that I hadn't heard these great songs in years.

[scott]

My favorite that I tried was the old Blanco ipa. I was curious, though, where do you get your music? Is it an xm station or a play list. Every song was a good song. I kept thinking to myself that I hadn't heard these great songs in years.

It's the commercial version of Pandora. We created a handful of custom stations for us, not sure which one was playing Sunday but glad you dug it!

[TeyshaBlue]

Let's see a cite for the 2T figure and the associated $100B increases in vet care.

Yeah, that's what I thought.:lol

[boutons_deux]

As the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan winds down, a recent report by Harvard Kennedy School lecturer Linda J. Bilmes ’80 predicts that the aggregate cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will fall between $4 and $6 trillion

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/4/5/report_cost_of_war/ (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/4/5/report_cost_of_war/)


Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629

etc, etc, etc.

[ChumpDumper]

Chump with the big Fail Whale.



http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxes/corporate-taxes/index.htmWe've already discussed your failure with effective rates.

[TeyshaBlue]

As the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan winds down, a recent report by Harvard Kennedy School lecturer Linda J. Bilmes ’80 predicts that the aggregate cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will fall between $4 and $6 trillion

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/4/5/report_cost_of_war/ (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/4/5/report_cost_of_war/)


Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629

etc, etc, etc.




Neither of those cites support your asinine stance that these charges are off the books. They've been appropriated since they began to be incurred over a decade ago. These figures don't pop into existance as an invoice, boutons. They've been budgeted and appropriated as needed, just like the VA costs.

[boutons_deux]

Neither of those cites support your asinine stance that these charges are off the books. They've been appropriated since they began to be incurred over a decade ago. These figures don't pop into existance as an invoice, boutons. They've been budgeted and appropriated as needed, just like the VA costs.

they've been financed with increased debt (bond sales), not with raising taxes, the usual way a country finances a war.

[boutons_deux]

We returned to the Treasury calculator and found that during Bush’s fiscal years, public debt rose from $3.3 trillion to $7.6 trillion -- up 130 percent, clearly more than double.

Also, we asked Sahr whether he agreed that debt doubled under Bush.

Adjusted for inflation, he said, public debt did not double, though it came close.

Sahr produced a spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmWzr4_cemD5dGlpa0IwZDYyaEJDLVh6cDQwSDY2Z lE#gid=0) for us with fiscal year-end debt numbers (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals) from the federal Office of Management and Budget. Among the results: As with the Treasury calculator, 2001-2009 public debt in non-inflation-adjusted dollars went up 130 percent. Adjusted for inflation (to 2011 dollars), though, the increase was 88 percent.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/jul/19/paul-sadler/paul-sadler-says-national-debt-doubled-under-georg/

[TeyshaBlue]

they've been financed with increased debt (bond sales), not with raising taxes, the usual way a country finances a war.

That's not my argument, strawman.

You plainly stated that these wars were paid for off the books. You've yet to substantiate that.

[TeyshaBlue]

:lol "usual way"
War bonds say "Hi!". http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/LibertyBond-WinsorMcCay.jpg/382px-LibertyBond-WinsorMcCay.jpg

[tlongII]

We've already discussed your failure with effective rates.

1) I never said effective rates.
2) You don't know what effective tax rates are anyway.

[boutons_deux]

That's not my argument, strawman.

You plainly stated that these wars were paid for off the books. You've yet to substantiate that.

they were off the Defense budget

[TeyshaBlue]

:lolSo you say.

Are you seriously suggesting that the military, while in the process of fighting a war, is not going to adjust their budget(s) for that war?

omfg....

[TeyshaBlue]

It's been part of the budget since 2010.

[TeyshaBlue]

Prior to that it was handled by appropriations, however, those were somewhere in the neighborhood of 188B outside of a budget of 518B. Hardly off the books since it's appropriated by Congress, labled as military expenditures and accounted for by the CBO and consequently, the justfacts analysis.

[TeyshaBlue]

Looking at this a little further: We don't fund well. Shocking, I know. There were budgets in 06,07 and 08 that did include expenditures, so the appropriations were supplemental. Not off the books at all.

[ChumpDumper]

1) I never said effective rates.So you wanted to outright lie. OK.

2) You don't know what effective tax rates are anyway.Of course I do. Don't get salty because your lie was exposed.

You were wrong whatever you were trying to lie about.

[TeyshaBlue]

:cry You interrupted my monlogue:cry


:lol

[tlongII]

So you wanted to outright lie. OK.
Of course I do. Don't get salty because your lie was exposed.

You were wrong whatever you were trying to lie about.

Show me then. Oh, and show your work and cite your sources!

[ChumpDumper]

Show me then. Oh, and show your work and cite your sources!What, you didn't read the links that were already spoon fed to you? Or are you just pretending they never happened?

Typical.

And pretty pathetic.

[tlongII]

What, you didn't read the links that were already spoon fed to you? Or are you just pretending they never happened?

Typical.

And pretty pathetic.

So you don't know what you're talking about. Got it. :tu

[ChumpDumper]

So you don't know what you're talking about. Got it. :tuYou're so salty about your failure you won't even talk about the subject anymore. The difference was posted. You didn't read it and now you're mad at me for reading what you should have read before hitting post thread.

Stick to posting pasty selfies for mail order brides.

[tlongII]

You're so salty about your failure you won't even talk about the subject anymore. The difference was posted. You didn't read it and now you're mad at me for reading what you should have read before hitting post thread.

Stick to posting pasty selfies for mail order brides.

I'm not salty about anything. I just continue to marvel at your ineptitude.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not salty about anything. I just continue to marvel at your ineptitude.You're the one who got owned by boutons of all people.

[tlongII]

You're the one who got owned by boutons of all people.

Riiiiiiiiiight. What I said is true. It hasn't been refuted. But keep living in your own fantasy world if you wish.

[ChumpDumper]

Riiiiiiiiiight. What I said is true. It hasn't been refuted. But keep living in your own fantasy world if you wish.boutons exposed you in one sentence.

[tlongII]

boutons exposed you in one sentence.

Weak!

I just exposed you in one word.

[ChumpDumper]

Weak!

I just exposed you in one word.Don't be mad. Just have your shit together next time you try to say something in this forum.

[tlongII]

Don't be mad. Just have your shit together next time you try to say something in this forum.

Who's mad? I've got facts. You're the one with shit.

[Th'Pusher]

Who's mad? I've got facts. You're the one with shit.
Wait, what fact do you have again?

[ChumpDumper]

Wait, what fact do you have again?The fact he pretends effective rates don't exist.

[tlongII]

The fact he pretends effective rates don't exist.

Really? Where did I reference effective rates?

[tlongII]

And since you're such a tool here's some more information for you...

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/another-study-confirms-us-has-one-highest-effective-corporate-tax-rates-world


Another Study Confirms: U.S. Has One of the Highest Effective Corporate Tax Rates in the World

Most people know by now that the United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. At 39.1 percent, it sits 14 percentage points higher than the OECD average.

However, many will point to all the “loopholes” that narrow the corporate tax base and say: “sure, we have the highest statutory rate, but no company pays that!” The implication is of course that U.S. corporations don’t pay a high tax rate compared internationally.

Contrary to this claim, studies show that not only does the United States have the highest statutory rate, but one of the highest effective tax rates. Our 2011 study on effective corporate tax rates shows this. It reviews a number of recent studies and concludes that the average effective rate is around 27 percent, while the average around the world is 20 percent

[tlongII]

And by the way I hate having to reference stuff for tools like you...

You people should already know this shit!

[scott]

Really? Where did I reference effective rates?

Why wouldn't you? That's the only rate that matters. Only an intellectually dishonest jackass, or an idiot, would focus on nominal rates. Especially when you can use effective rates and still make your point.

[ChumpDumper]

Really? Where did I reference effective rates?As scott succinctly put it, that's precisely the point.

[sickdsm]

As usual boutons turns every topic into a repub/liberal name calling debate. Hes more worried about pushing blame every time than the actual topic.

Those benefitting from social programs the most will be hurt the most. The risk of trying to make big bucks seem not worth it when the tax dollars get bigger.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

lol a subsidy receiving farmer complaining about how the gubbamint treats him :lol

[sickdsm]

I paid many many times more in than what I've received.


Irregardless I won't be rioting and looting like most of the cities will be if the the dollar collapses along with it budget cuts.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I paid many many times more in than what I've received.


Irregardless I won't be rioting and looting like most of the cities will be if the the dollar collapses along with it budget cuts.
lol admitting you received gubbamint subsidies

keep sucking det teet

[sickdsm]

Everyone does in. One form or another. Subsidized cars and gas. Subsidized water for towns built in the desert.

Your lieing if you deny it.

[Th'Pusher]

Everyone does in. One form or another. Subsidized cars and gas. Subsidized water for towns built in the desert.

Your lieing if you deny it.
And what were your thoughts on the recent farm bill that passed the house?

[scroteface]

you guys really took my thread off topic smh

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Everyone does in. One form or another. Subsidized cars and gas. Subsidized water for towns built in the desert.

Your lieing if you deny it.
No denying that but farmers are some of the biggest takers in America :lol

Billions in annual subsidies in exchange for a bunch of shitty GMO-filled crops :lol

[scroteface]

Billions in annual subsidies in exchange for a bunch of shitty GMO-filled crops :lol

my biggest regret on a daily basis is having to eat that crap because i don't truly have any alternative. the assholes making that stuff ought to serve prison time tbh shits banned in most european countries.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

my biggest regret on a daily basis is having to eat that crap because i don't truly have any alternative. the assholes making that stuff ought to serve prison time tbh shits banned in most european countries.
Only alternative is spending a lot more money and taking a lot more time shopping for groceries to ensure you're buying organic which I basically do every Sunday. The GMO stuff was my final straw once I read up on it tbh.

[scroteface]

Only alternative is spending a lot more money and taking a lot more time shopping for groceries to ensure you're buying organic which I basically do every Sunday. The GMO stuff was my final straw once I read up on it tbh.


yeah but it gets messier once u find out all the ingredients and components in certain things contain genetically modified foods in them, like for instance cottonseed oil or anything with corn etc. they make it to where its hard to truly avoid it, and then there's the dilemma of that whole work thing and not being able to cook 3 organic meals per day while youre at work plus snacks in between. and then money is another contsraint, it's really really hard to avoid.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

yeah but it gets messier once u find out all the ingredients and components in certain things contain genetically modified foods in them, like for instance cottonseed oil or anything with corn etc. they make it to where its hard to truly avoid it, and then there's the dilemma of that whole work thing and not being able to cook 3 organic meals per day while youre at work plus snacks in between. and then money is another contsraint, it's really really hard to avoid.
Yup pretty much. That's why I spend all day Sunday buying food and preparing it for the week. The best solution to the cooking 3 organic meals per day problem is cooking in bulk at the beginning of the week.

It's still a pain in the ass though. I used to cook a bunch with olive oil till I figured out olive oil is basically a sure thing to have genetically modified ingredients :lol

[leemajors]

Yup pretty much. That's why I spend all day Sunday buying food and preparing it for the week. The best solution to the cooking 3 organic meals per day problem is cooking in bulk at the beginning of the week.

It's still a pain in the ass though. I used to cook a bunch with olive oil till I figured out olive oil is basically a sure thing to have genetically modified ingredients :lol

tried mct oil? fairly tasteless and great if you cook under 325 degrees

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

tried mct oil? fairly tasteless and great if you cook under 325 degrees
I get organic olive oil now, unfortunately it's expensive as fuck :lol

[tlongII]

Why wouldn't you? That's the only rate that matters. Only an intellectually dishonest jackass, or an idiot, would focus on nominal rates. Especially when you can use effective rates and still make your point.

Because I didn't.

[Th'Pusher]

Because I didn't.
Because you're not only an intellectually dishonest jackass, but you're also an idiot.

[tlongII]

Because you're not only an intellectually dishonest jackass, but you're also an idiot.

If you want to see an idiot look in the mirror.

[Th'Pusher]

If you want to see an idiot look in the mirror.
Fuck. Add some value you piece of garbage.

[2centsworth]

Why wouldn't you? That's the only rate that matters. Only an intellectually dishonest jackass, or an idiot, would focus on nominal rates. Especially when you can use effective rates and still make your point.

I gotta disagree a little bit here. Though effective rates are the "bottom-line", the higher the nominal rate the higher the "tax avoidance" costs are to the corporations and costs to our government in loss "revenue". I used the term revenue for understanding but not because I believe in such a concept at the federal level.

As far as the right level, I think we would need to agree on what we're trying to accomplish by taxing corporations. Some believe in the "revenue" theory, so taxes are used to pay our bills, while some like me believe taxes regulate the growth of the economy.

[Th'Pusher]

I gotta disagree a little bit here. Though effective rates are the "bottom-line", the higher the nominal rate the higher the "tax avoidance" costs are to the corporations and costs to our government in loss "revenue". I used the term revenue for understanding but not because I believe in such a concept at the federal level.

As far as the right level, I think we would need to agree on what we're trying to accomplish by taxing corporations. Some believe in the "revenue" theory, so taxes are used to pay our bills, while some like me believe taxes regulate the growth of the economy.
Not that it's realistic but you could probably talk me into no corporate taxes at all. What is the benefit of taxing the corporation? Tax the individual that profit from the corporation.

[sickdsm]

And what were your thoughts on the recent farm bill that passed the house?

Id like to eliminate as much as possible. The only thing thats of value to me is the crop insurance. All farm subsidies get passed along as land costs. $15/acre in payments just equal $15/ rent. All in all i dont really follow much of the farm bill voteing until its finalized as it usually means nothing until then. I applaud the splitting of the food program as most people think its all handouts to farmers. Id like to see the farm program end completely. There are too much restrictions as to what can or cannot be done. The biggest benefit is not a subsidy but the renewable fuel mandate. I think its rediculous that we allow the oil companies to buy there way out of using ethanol though.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Why do farmers need subsidies? Are yall too stupid to provide for yourselves without gubbamint help?

[sickdsm]

Not that it's realistic but you could probably talk me into no corporate taxes at all. What is the benefit of taxing the corporation? Tax the individual that profit from the corporation.



I think it was Romney that got a little heat for saying "Corporations are people, too." I think people seem to hear corporation and think IBM, Microsoft, Monsanto, etc..

I'm in my early thirties, wife is 28. We are a corporation. Just us two individuals. We still are paying her student loans and a mortgage on our $56k house. I drive a rusty '99 Dodge Ram. Pretty meager lifestyle. I had a great year last year. Banner year. I bought some expensive property then. Fast forward to tax season. We hire a smaller company to do our taxes, they specialize in corporate farms. I ended up paying $55k in federal taxes. OK, i had a great year, that's fine. Fast forward to my corporate taxes, I'm ashamed at what they are trying to say I owe. Its more than I made all year. Early planting last year, late this year meant my inputs did not get applied in my corporate year. There are some things i might be able to do but i don't know yet. The things that made me jaded about it this year though are that federal income taxes are not deductible the following year. Savers are punished, spenders are rewarded. Bare property is not deductible. Put a crappy building on it and depreciate it alot. You're better off to spend money on crap you don't need in order to expense/depreciate than you are to scrape by. The tax code is f-d. Fair share? Why should i pay more because every saturday i treat like a weekday and most sundays also? I bust my butt and stay up at night worrying about things for what? So i can "pay my fair share"? Flat tax or national sales tax is very interesting to me. It would probably eliminate alot of irs jobs. But people like boutons seem to think that a private job is the same as a govt job when dealing with job growth, so thats probably out of the picture. Its very tempting to take a $50k job for both the wife and I and take all risk and worry out of the picture. We could actually enroll our sons in Tball and things like that instead of working late. Its BS when we have to make sure to send in child support for our employee. Where did personal responsibility go?

[sickdsm]

Why do farmers need subsidies? Are yall too stupid to provide for yourselves without gubbamint help?


Id like to see the farm program end completely.

Read much lately?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Id like to see the farm program end completely.

Read much lately?
You say that but what you'd supposedly like to see didn't stop you from taking gubbamint handouts.

[sickdsm]

my biggest regret on a daily basis is having to eat that crap because i don't truly have any alternative. the assholes making that stuff ought to serve prison time tbh shits banned in most european countries.

Deer and geese eat GMO soybeans and corn extensively. They surely aren't suffering.

I have a few neighbors that raise non GMO soybeans. Funny how the GMO ones go in the same bin as the non GMO ones.

They don't know what they are eating though i've been told. #shrugs

Me, i could care less. I'll grow dandelions if thats whats's legal and profitable. I don't think the current GMO varieties are a problem, of more concern is the over-processed foods. I think there should be as much of an outrage over twinkies.

Usually the same people think that Round up is the problem when its harmless because it has no residual effect.


Its funny that you compare the farm here to Europe. I've read they are pretty big on subsidies over there.

[sickdsm]

You say that but what you'd supposedly like to see didn't stop you from taking gubbamint handouts.

Try competing with a competitor that has an financial advantage that you won't accept and see how many months until your'e out of business.


What do you do?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Try competing with a competitor that has an financial advantage that you won't accept and see how many months until your'e out of business.


What do you do?
I'd pull myself up by my bootstraps like a true 'Murican capitalist.

[sickdsm]

Back to the topic that had my interest in the first place.

What do the people that feel the collapse of the dollar is not coming think happens when you print while continuing to go in debt farther every year will happen?


"That's as good as money, sir. Those are I.O.U.'s. Go ahead and add it up, every cent's accounted for. Look, see this? That's a car. 275 thou. Might wanna hang onto that one."

[sickdsm]

I'd pull myself up by my bootstraps like a true 'Murican capitalist.

No, What do you do for a living? Not theoretically, I mean physically.

[Rogue]

My solution to it is: cooking everything by myself, and not cooking no meat at all. I'd always prefer the food made by myself to any ready-made food served in a restaurant or sold in a grocer, and it's also a good tip on living a frugal life imho

[sickdsm]

My solution to it is: cooking everything by myself, and not cooking no meat at all. I'd always prefer the food made by myself to any ready-made food served in a restaurant or sold in a grocer, and it's also a good tip on living a frugal life imho

Trying to lose a few pounds and i agree from a health standpoint about trying to avoid meat in general, free range or GMO. Its amazing how cheap one can eat when they dont overindulge.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

No, What do you do for a living? Not theoretically, I mean physically.

I'm a financial analyst for a large bank. Entry level so I only make 60k a year but I live in Texas so that's more than enough to get me by.

[Rogue]

60k a year doesn't sound too bad for a recent graduate in this economy imho. I know some people who've been working for 5+ years and still only earning 1.5k to 2k a month, which's downright derisory in America I think.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

60k a year doesn't sound too bad for a recent graduate in this economy imho. I know some people who've been working for 5+ years and still only earning 1.5k to 2k a month, which's downright derisory in America I think.
The median wage in America isn't a whole lot more than 2k a month which is sad given how rich America is as a country.

And yes, I have absolutely no complaints about 60k a year.

[sickdsm]

I'm a financial analyst for a large bank. Entry level so I only make 60k a year but I live in Texas so that's more than enough to get me by.

When you're on your own you'll understand my frustrations. Not trying to be a dick but collecting a paycheck is much different than writing one.

[scroteface]

60k in Texas with no family to support will get you anything u want plus be able to save a shit ton tbh

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

When you're on your own you'll understand my frustrations. Not trying to be a dick but collecting a paycheck is much different than writing one.
I have no doubt it is. I think the current system burdens small business owners which is a big reason why I'm for public healthcare so small businesses don't have to pay out the ass to ensure their employees while it's a drop-in-the-bucket cost for large businesses.

Honest question, when Mitt Romney was saying "Corporations are people too!" do you really think he was saying it with people like you in mind?

[Rogue]

Trying to lose a few pounds and i agree from a health standpoint about trying to avoid meat in general, free range or GMO. Its amazing how cheap one can eat when they dont overindulge.
Agree, people more often than not eat meat for its taste rather than its nutrition imho. Eggs contain every substance meat has that your body needs, and eggs are much chaper and much easier to cook.

[sickdsm]

People like me? you mean small business? I don't know. I feel that he meant there is a person or many behind each. Too often we think if you're a big business, you don't deserve profit or you're employees are more important that the company.

Someone, somewhere busted there ass or took risks to make that big company.

I also think price gouging is totally acceptable so i'm probably just a piece of trash anyway.

[Rogue]

I have no doubt it is. I think the current system burdens small business owners which is a big reason why I'm for public healthcare so small businesses don't have to pay out the ass to ensure their employees while it's a drop-in-the-bucket cost for large businesses.

Honest question, when Mitt Romney was saying "Corporations are people too!" do you really think he was saying it with people like you in mind?
Small business would rather hire illegal aliens for whom they don't need to pay healthcare at all. If you think the current system burdens small business owners, you're supposed to be an opponent against the idea of "public healthcare" or compulsory healthcare which would financially squash them even more, imho.

[sickdsm]

I have no doubt it is. I think the current system burdens small business owners which is a big reason why I'm for public healthcare so small businesses don't have to pay out the ass to ensure their employees while it's a drop-in-the-bucket cost for large businesses.

Honest question, when Mitt Romney was saying "Corporations are people too!" do you really think he was saying it with people like you in mind?

I don't know the answer to healthcare but my very healthy family of the wife and two young boys are over $11k a year with a $2500 deductable. All the more reason that somedays i think i should just move to Galt's Gulch and say f it.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Small business would rather hire illegal aliens for whom they don't need to pay healthcare at all. If you think the current system burdens small business owners, you're supposed to be an opponent against the idea of "public healthcare" or compulsory healthcare which would financially squash them even more, imho.
No it wouldn't. Public healthcare would level the playing field. Right now bigger companies can provide better private healthcare to their employees at a lower cost per employee than small businesses can.

[sickdsm]

Small business would rather hire illegal aliens for whom they don't need to pay healthcare at all. If you think the current system burdens small business owners, you're supposed to be an opponent against the idea of "public healthcare" or compulsory healthcare which would financially squash them even more, imho.

Illegal aliens aren't around here much but i'd imagine that if they were available that the work ethic would be better and the main reason why a company would want to do that.

The only manual labor available here is drugged out and/or spends their days typically playing many hours of Black Ops. Which is why i really don't think much of when I hear how hard it is to get a job. Either move or become competent.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I don't know the answer to healthcare but my very healthy family of the wife and two young boys are over $11k a year with a $2500 deductable. All the more reason that somedays i think i should just move to Galt's Gulch and say f it.
Yup. You're not a part of a large pool so you get screwed regardless of your health. In a true single payer system (not :lolbamacare) small businesses don't get shoved in the ass with healthcare costs.

The company I work for provides a preferred PPO plan to me where I pay $55 a month, which is something any small business would be incapable of doing.

[sickdsm]

Yup. You're not a part of a large pool so you get screwed regardless of your health. In a true single payer system (not :lolbamacare) small businesses don't get shoved in the ass with healthcare costs.

The company I work for provides a preferred PPO plan to me where I pay $55 a month, which is something any small business would be incapable of doing.


BC&BS I called a few years ago prior to having our second son and asked if we could move to a higher deductable but keep maternity. Long pause, Well there IS a plan with a $5000 deductable but you would have to give up maternity.

My brother has rheumatoid arthritis. I had pain in my knee for a year and i had it checked out and asked them if it was that. They said no, i just overused it and needed to rehab it. Fast forward a year later when we changed to a family plan they wanted to put a rider on for ligament damage. I don't see how that's even possible.

[Rogue]

It would be great if health insurance could be purchansed on a leveled ground for everyone, but I believe that healthcare should be optional rather than obligatory. For example, I'm healthy and vigorous as fuck so I'm probably never gonna need that shit. Some politicians (you know who) are trying to impose it on everyone's head like tax, and I don't see how they're gonna succeed doing this in a true democracy that the US is.

[sickdsm]

It would be great if health insurance could be purchansed on a leveled ground for everyone, but I believe that healthcare should be optional rather than obligatory. For example, I'm healthy and vigorous as fuck so I'm probably never gonna need that shit. Some politicians (you know who) are trying to impose it on everyone's head like tax, and I don't see how they're gonna succeed doing this in a true democracy that the US is.

For healthcare to be optional and fairly priced in my unwise eyes the only option is to curtail free healthcare for the poor.

Nothing is free, those that pay for insurance are also paying for those without.

[pgardn]

It's still a pain in the ass though. I used to cook a bunch with olive oil till I figured out olive oil is basically a sure thing to have genetically modified ingredients :lol

What do you figure genetically modified olive oil will do to you, just out of curiosity?

[boutons_deux]

"in my unwise eyes the only option is to curtail free healthcare for the poor."

your eyes are full of shit, seeing that the poor are the (primary? sole?) cause of the USA paying double what other industrial countries pay for health care and getting worse health outcomes.

On the topic of the poor, if Walmart and other labor exploiters paid a living wage, the working poor could make (public) health insurance payments without taxpayer support.

[boutons_deux]

Why does the American middle class continue to struggle financially?

A brief summary:

Household spending on goods that fulfill pleasure, self-esteem, or social status needs have generally been falling, including personal care items, apparel, home furnishings, and automobiles.

However, consumption spending has risen most in four product categories that shape families' health, safety, and economic viability: health care, education, housing, and commuting costs.

Prices in these four product markets have greatly outpaced both wages and prices in general.

Americans may be systematically pressed to overspend on housing because access to better schools, public services, and transportation infrastructure varies considerably across communities, and better-heeled communities often restrict affordable housing developments. Americans may face a relatively high well-being penalty for living in more modestly-priced homes.

Compared to other highly-developed countries, the U.S. does considerably less to control the personal financial burden borne by households to ensure access to these products and services essential to well-being.

Soaring tuition and health care costs are not the principal drivers of household financial distress, but they constitute the fastest-growing problem.

Cohen argues that our penchant to blame household spending problems on wastefulness or frivolities obscures the fact that Americans increasingly face a lose-lose dilemma in which they must choose between sustainable finances and access to quality schools, child care, medical care, public safety, and employment opportunities.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-08/asa-wdt080613.php

[sickdsm]

"in my unwise eyes the only option is to curtail free healthcare for the poor."

your eyes are full of shit, seeing that the poor are the (primary? sole?) cause of the USA paying double what other industrial countries pay for health care and getting worse health outcomes.

On the topic of the poor, if Walmart and other labor exploiters paid a living wage, the working poor could make (public) health insurance payments without taxpayer support.





So by not requiring everyone to have health insurance, what solution do you have to provide insurance for the poor?

One that does not consist of me paying theirs either through bloated premiums or medical costs.

Also without the use of taxes?

Why is it my responsibility?

I'm already fed up with the current risk/reward system. Now you expect me to somehow foot another $12k for my employee? (I pay the nonsmoking healthy single premium for him)

Sounds to me it would be a lot easier if I just downsize and get rid of an employee.

[Suspect]

zeitgeist

[scott]

I gotta disagree a little bit here. Though effective rates are the "bottom-line", the higher the nominal rate the higher the "tax avoidance" costs are to the corporations and costs to our government in loss "revenue". I used the term revenue for understanding but not because I believe in such a concept at the federal level.

As far as the right level, I think we would need to agree on what we're trying to accomplish by taxing corporations. Some believe in the "revenue" theory, so taxes are used to pay our bills, while some like me believe taxes regulate the growth of the economy.

Fair point, though when I saw "all that matters" I did mean within the context of the discussion at hand.

And in your above statement, I think you mean to say "the higher the nominal rate, the higher the "tax avoidance" benefit to the corporation."

If taxes are zero, there is no benefit to avoid paying them. The higher the tax rate, the greater incentive to find ways to avoid paying them (which includes still-legal methods such as hiring employees and increased capital spending)

[2centsworth]

Fair point, though when I saw "all that matters" I did mean within the context of the discussion at hand.

And in your above statement, I think you mean to say "the higher the nominal rate, the higher the "tax avoidance" benefit to the corporation."

If taxes are zero, there is no benefit to avoid paying them. The higher the tax rate, the greater incentive to find ways to avoid paying them (which includes still-legal methods such as hiring employees and increased capital spending)

Lots of legal ways, though admittedly gray, including tax shelters and havens. Deductions/expenses that force you to spend $1 to receive $.42 in benefit make no financial sense in a vacuum. Anyways, wasn't trying to pick-up where Tlong fell short. Just thought I would add my 2cents.

[scott]

Lots of legal ways, though admittedly gray, including tax shelters and havens. Deductions/expenses that force you to spend $1 to receive $.42 in benefit make no financial sense in a vacuum. Anyways, wasn't trying to pick-up where Tlong fell short. Just thought I would add my 2cents.

*When* hiring or capital investment are the top alternative, "$1 for $0.42" isn't the proper way to look it though. The right way to evaluate it at the margin is "$1*(1-marginal tax rate)" of investment for "$X (the marginal ROI)".

The problem is that "gray" (or explicitly illegal) tax shelters have increased the cost of hiring and capital spending. This is the whole rationale behind the idea of closing loopholes & lowering nominal rates (and even potentially effective rates) for a broader tax base as employment & output increase.

The biggest problem with the arguments of popular tax reformers is that they miss this, and focus on "less taxes means more money to hire/invest". We don't have a collective "ability to pay" problem among corporations, we have a "willingness to pay" problem bc our tax code has skewed incentives by making tax shelters so readily accessible.

But to be fair, I can see why the full logic of the need for reform would be lost on a segment of the population: there are those (far left liberals) who could never get behind any reduction in nominal rates, and there are those (tea party) who could never get behind limiting a company's right to shelter themselves from taxes via shady loopholes

[2centsworth]

*When* hiring or capital investment are the top alternative, "$1 for $0.42" isn't the proper way to look it though. The right way to evaluate it at the margin is "$1*(1-marginal tax rate)" of investment for "$X (the marginal ROI)".

The problem is that "gray" (or explicitly illegal) tax shelters have increased the cost of hiring and capital spending. This is the whole rationale behind the idea of closing loopholes & lowering nominal rates (and even potentially effective rates) for a broader tax base as employment & output increase.

The biggest problem with the arguments of popular tax reformers is that they miss this, and focus on "less taxes means more money to hire/invest". We don't have a collective "ability to pay" problem among corporations, we have a "willingness to pay" problem bc our tax code has skewed incentives by making tax shelters so readily accessible.

But to be fair, I can see why the full logic of the need for reform would be lost on a segment of the population: there are those (far left liberals) who could never get behind any reduction in nominal rates, and there are those (tea party) who could never get behind limiting a company's right to shelter themselves from taxes via shady loopholes


I'll respond more fully later, but your first paragraph seems to suggest raising taxes would result in lower unemployment and increased corp capital expenditures?

[boutons_deux]

I'll respond more fully later, but your first paragraph seems to suggest raising taxes would result in lower unemployment and increased corp capital expenditures?

yes, low corporate/capital taxes encourages corp mgmt, now mostly paid in 15% capital gains stock options (on that which they don't hide overseas) to maximize the profits (lay people off, reduce investment, etc etc), pay dividends, stock buy backs rather the retain the profits for investment. High taxes encourage investment to reduce the profit margin and taxes paid.

[scott]

I'll respond more fully later, but your first paragraph seems to suggest raising taxes would result in lower unemployment and increased corp capital expenditures?

If you don't close loopholes, then no. Then raising rates will only give more incentive to shelter in other ways.

An alternative interpretation would be that eliminating loopholes would have the intended effect.

Accelerating depreciation could also have a similar effect.

[2centsworth]

If you don't close loopholes, then no. Then raising rates will only give more incentive to shelter in other ways.

An alternative interpretation would be that eliminating loopholes would have the intended effect.

Accelerating depreciation could also have a similar effect.

so lets pretend all loopholes are closed. Are you saying that raising the tax rate on freetail to 60% would lead you to hire more people and make additional capital purchases? Ill admit im in the camp that believes lowering your tax rate would incentivize you to invest more in your company, while raising your rate would make it tougher for you to stay in business.

[scott]

so lets pretend all loopholes are closed. Are you saying that raising the tax rate on freetail to 60% would lead you to hire more people and make additional capital purchases? Ill admit im in the camp that believes lowering your tax rate would incentivize you to invest more in your company, while raising your rate would make it tougher for you to stay in business.

That's also not what I said. In fact, I explicitly paid out the argument of lowering rates while closing loopholes.

There is an upper limit to the rate at which you can pay tax where you add an "ability to pay" problem to the "willingness to pay" problem.

There was a thread about this I started previously (that I could find some other time- I'm typing from my iPhone now), but there is a point where taxes are too low, and the incentive favors keeping all profits over investing, and there is an obvious point where raising taxes too high removes the incentive to operate a business at all.

[scott]

I'd also advocate for reforms to make a form of accelerated depreciation (like Sec 179) permanent.

[2centsworth]

That's also not what I said. In fact, I explicitly paid out the argument of lowering rates while closing loopholes.

There is an upper limit to the rate at which you can pay tax where you add an "ability to pay" problem to the "willingness to pay" problem.

There was a thread about this I started previously (that I could find some other time- I'm typing from my iPhone now), but there is a point where taxes are too low, and the incentive favors keeping all profits over investing, and there is an obvious point where raising taxes too high removes the incentive to operate a business at all.

Im asking for clarity and not to put words in your mouth. As far as lower limits, how can you spend profits without making a distribution that's taxable to the individual or making capital expenditures? Also, wouldn't the incentive be to make more profit, which would require more labor and capital expenditures?

I agree on the upper limits.

I think the end game is to decide what's the goal for taxing? At the local level obviously to pay bills, but at the federal level i believe it's to promote full employment and tame inflation, much like the fed with interest rates.

[scott]

Im asking for clarity and not to put words in your mouth. As far as lower limits, how can you spend profits without making a distribution that's taxable to the individual or making capital expenditures? Also, wouldn't the incentive be to make more profit, which would require more labor and capital expenditures?

I agree on the upper limits.

I think the end game is to decide what's the goal for taxing? At the local level obviously to pay bills, but at the federal level i believe it's to promote full employment and tame inflation, much like the fed with interest rates.

I will get back to this when I get back from vacation , this isn't much fun on my iPhone :)

[TeyshaBlue]

I will get back to this when I get back from vacation , this isn't much fun on my iPhone :)

Smart phone posting is a beating!