Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,602 Year: 4,859/9,624 Month: 207/427 Week: 17/103 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Current Global Recession
onifre
Member (Idle past 3033 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 16 of 49 (502225)
03-10-2009 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by kuresu
03-10-2009 9:59 AM


You realize you contradicted yourself? How can the government become fiscally responsible without tax revenue?
Not in the least, I said "now they want more money"...?
I understand the need for tax revenue. I am well aware of the necessary contribution from the citizens who use various programs, roads, government funded aid, etc. The issue is not that we shouldn't pay taxes, rather the issue is, what is the government doing with our tax money and what will they do about the obvious mismanagement of it that we, the tax payers, see?
Eventually tax payers get frustrated at the actions of the government which is supposed to work for them, NOT the other way around. A tax increase places more of a demand on the tax payer, who now has to compensate for the difference in their income. Even if it's a small amount, which we can be skeptical of, the fact remains that the government has not proven to the citizens that it works for that they are dependable and responsible with the money they already take from us. How could they ask us for more money if they've shit-the-bed when handling the revenue they already get?
Sometimes pumping more money into a failing business can benefit in the long run, but the business itself has to show potential for investment. If it doesn't, no one will invest, without taking a huge risk, which can also be beneficial but at the full risk of the investors, in this case that would be us, the tax payers. I think we should not be asked to take that risk judging by the state of the economy, the job market and the housing market. In my opinion, it's just not fair.

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by kuresu, posted 03-10-2009 9:59 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Taq, posted 03-10-2009 6:28 PM onifre has replied
 Message 21 by kuresu, posted 03-10-2009 7:03 PM onifre has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 3033 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 17 of 49 (502230)
03-10-2009 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by kuresu
03-10-2009 9:37 AM


Um, overreact much?
Yes
True, I think taxes should be raised, but I never said that in my previous post.
Your right, you didn't, but your support for the tax increase was reasonably seen when I read it...IMO. I guess I was right, though, you do support the increase?
A little something called a national debt
...due to the governments mismanagement of revenue, over spending and badly allocated investments. Not our fault, nor our burden to pay. At least not in the sense that they should increase our taxes to do so. If they can fuck it up they can fix it.
Current tax revenues won't cut it.
Tough shit - I don't mean to be a cynic but that is a bogus claim. What will cut it is not more of our tax money, it'll be a better managed system. In the long run, since they love to throw that term in our face, if they prove to us that they are resonsible with handling our tax revenue then an increase can be asked for since there will be something to show us for our increased investment.
Did you know that the IRS misses about 350 billion dollars in taxes each year?
Who told you that, the government or the IRS...?
Should we shed a tear for them? Don't worry they'll be in my prayers this tax season.
*"Lord if you can hear me, please let the grossly over funded, highly corrupt government that can't seem to budget their finances properly really dig into us tax payers and collect all their deserved revenue this year...In Jesus name we pray, Amen"
*PS. "Lord if you can see to it, there are a few million Americans who lack basic necessities like housing, education, food, health care, etc. After you help the government collect all their greed money, can you possibly help the less fortunate too?"..."Oh yeah, Amen"
*These should get the bats swinging a little harder - lol

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by kuresu, posted 03-10-2009 9:37 AM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by dronestar, posted 03-10-2009 1:47 PM onifre has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 18 of 49 (502255)
03-10-2009 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by onifre
03-10-2009 12:30 PM


expenditures related to the wars IS on topic
Good points Onifre. However, please allow me to nitpick this one item:
. . . due to the governments mismanagement of revenue, over spending and badly allocated investments. Not our fault, nor our burden to pay.
Errm, not quite. Unfortunately, it is our fault, it is our burden. We elect the government we deserve, (no one had a gun to their head when they voted Bush or Obama) . . .
Obama's projected military spending, is ROUGHLY the same as George W. Bush's (another immoral policy continued). USA spends ABOUT the same on defense as the rest of the world COMBINED (not including the two on-going wars). How in the world is that fiscally responsible? The American public continues to elect officials who continue to choose hegemony and continued military spending (and/or increased taxes) over health care, infrastructure, and education.
Issues - Center for American Progress
Obama plans to spend as much on defense as Bush did.
Fred Kagan on Monday: "The civil war in Iraq is over" | Salon.com
All illegal and immoral positions aside (the topic IS Current Global Recession), consider the fiscal irresponsibilities of the Iraq and the Afghanistan war. I do not want ANY tax increase while those economic boondoggles continue. Funny, no matter how bad the recession/depression, military spending stays sacrosanct. Hardly a politician goes there.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." - Dwight Eisenhower
http://www.slmk.org/larom/ENG/economy.html

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 12:30 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 2:18 PM dronestar has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 3033 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 19 of 49 (502264)
03-10-2009 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by dronestar
03-10-2009 1:47 PM


Re: expenditures related to the wars IS on topic
Unfortunately, it is our fault, it is our burden.
You would agree though that coercing voters to vote for a particular side, once realized, pushes the fault back onto the side that did/is doing the coercing, yes?
That we continue to allow ourselves to be coerced, and side with one particular side over the other, IS, I will agree, our fault.
The latter is where I place the fault on the citizens. But, the power of propaganda is so strong that most don't realized they're being coerced...until it is all the way in.
All illegal and immoral positions aside (the topic IS Current Global Recession), consider the fiscal irresponsibilities of the Iraq and the Afghanistan war. I do not want ANY tax increase while those economic boondoggles continue. Funny, no matter how bad the recession/depression, military spending stays sacrosanct. Hardly a politician goes there.
Agreed!
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." - Dwight Eisenhower
Nice...

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by dronestar, posted 03-10-2009 1:47 PM dronestar has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 20 of 49 (502291)
03-10-2009 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by onifre
03-10-2009 11:58 AM


Not in the least, I said "now they want more money"...?
If you, personally, had run up a big debt and needed to start paying for health care would your first response be "Boy, I need to stop making as much money"? Of course not, right?
Yes, spending does need to be reigned in. Absolutely. But should we let everything go down the tubes because of our disdain of government spending? That doesn't make sense, at least to me. In the short term a raise in taxes is necessary. If and when the government budget and government debt is in the black then we can start talking about lowering taxes.
As for the global recession, it will take time. If I understand the problem correctly, captial has to make it's way back into the system to pay for paper losses. To use an analogy, it's as if someone ran up their credit cards and use the money to play blackjack, and lost it all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 11:58 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 7:13 PM Taq has replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 21 of 49 (502299)
03-10-2009 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by onifre
03-10-2009 11:58 AM


Isn't the definition of fiscal irresponsibility spending money you don't have?
Well, they're spending money. A lot more money than usual. If you want them to be fiscally responsible, they need greater revenue. You object to raising revenue because you apparently feel that the government can spend less wastefully in order to find the revenue to pay for the increased spending.
What, exactly, is the percentage of the budget that is from graft, corruption, or wasteful spending? Do you think 300 billion dollars of waste exists in the budget? 500 billion dollars? So we eliminate that wasteful spending. Guess what: our deficit this year will likely be 1.75 trillion dollars. So even if there's 500 billion dollars of waste (accounting for nearly 17% of the annual budget, and such a high level of waste does not, quite frankly, exist), there's still a 1.25 trillion dollar hole that needs to be filled. Never mind the other 11 trillion dollars in the debt, or the annual deficits each year.
Now, you can argue that the deficit is the result of improper spending (TARP, ARRA, and the housing plan plus the original deficit), but now that the money's spent, wouldn't it be fiscally responsible to raise taxes to raise the revenue needed to pay for it all?
That's where your contradiction comes. You want them to be fiscally responsible. The only way they can do so is to raise taxes, or as you put it, to take more of your money. But you don't want to give it to them.
Life isn't fair.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 11:58 AM onifre has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 3033 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 22 of 49 (502302)
03-10-2009 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Taq
03-10-2009 6:28 PM


If you, personally, had run up a big debt and needed to start paying for health care would your first response be "Boy, I need to stop making as much money"? Of course not, right?
I'm not getting this analogy?
You speak of this debt as if you actually took part in the business of spending it. If we are all going to wave off what our government did over the past 8 years, more specifically the last 4 years, with our tax money, then sure, pump more money blindly into a system that has been failing for the last 4 years, just keep waving it off until our arms get tired.
If our government wants more of an investment from it's tax payers this US government needs to show it's tax payers responsibility AND lets not forget accountability as well.
We are in a recession, in the beginning of a global recession, these are not the times to ask the less fortunate, barely getting by, struggling with their morgages, health care, education, etc, for a raise.
As they would say in the ever failing job market, "Sorry US government, we just don't have it in OUR budget to increase your pay. But, we will be evaluating your job performance in the coming years and will re-visit the idea once you have proven your worth".
But should we let everything go down the tubes because of our disdain of government spending?
Tubes? What tubes? Does anybody know where the tubes are? Whos controling the tubes? Where are the fucking tubes?! - George Carlin
In the short term a raise in taxes is necessary.
You can make an argument for this and convince many people that you're right, myself included perhaps, but I don't see why we need to pump more money when they have failed with the money they initially had. If we put the horse before cart we see the reality of the situation. They need to prove they can do the job before we invest more.
Plus, that is IF we take their word for it that they need the extra money. I don't know if you've ever had to formulate a budget and get funding for it before but I can attest to having inflated many areas where I could have done with much less. Not saying this is happening, but I'm not trusting shit from them.
The point is the current economic situation is hurting the middle class and the poor, hard. Why place a bigger demand on them?
-and-
Why are we getting behind a plan that we aren't sure will work, nor can be sure wll work?
Do you really want to take that risk with this government?

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Taq, posted 03-10-2009 6:28 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by kuresu, posted 03-10-2009 7:35 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 26 by Jazzns, posted 03-11-2009 11:50 AM onifre has replied
 Message 37 by Taq, posted 03-11-2009 4:13 PM onifre has replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 23 of 49 (502303)
03-10-2009 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by onifre
03-10-2009 7:13 PM


The point is the current economic situation is hurting the middle class and the poor, hard. Why place a bigger demand on them?
-and-
Why are we getting behind a plan that we aren't sure will work, nor can be sure wll work?
Do you really want to take that risk with this government?
Um, who's getting the tax raises? That's right, those who make 200,000 or 250,000 a year. In fact, the ARRA just lowered taxes, though not by much (400/800 dollars per year) for just about everybody.
As to whether the ARRA, TARP 2.0 (whatever that plan may be), and the housing/mortgage plan will work and why we should try. Doing nothing will lead to a real catastrophe (why? a 15% reduction in GDP is not fun). The question really isn't whether these plans will or won't work. The question is how effective they will be. Can we pull a Sweden? Or will we be Japan? Quite frankly, even Japan's lost decade is preferable to what would happen if we did nothing.
Welcome to the world of lemon socialism: where profits are privatized and losses are nationalized. Trouble is, if it wasn't for nationalization being a dirty word for business, we could actually get somewhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 7:13 PM onifre has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 24 of 49 (502349)
03-11-2009 9:24 AM


The Iraq War will have wasted over TWO TRILLION dollars
Immoral and illegalities aside, the Iraq War will have wasted over TWO TRILLION tax dollars (probably over THREE Trillion dollars). Even in a healthy economy, this is sheer madness.
The Three Trillion Dollar War - Wikipedia
Joseph Stiglitz - Wikipedia
The Times & The Sunday Times
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../03/07/AR2008030702846.html

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 25 of 49 (502379)
03-11-2009 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Sarawak
03-10-2009 11:57 AM


Most people don't understand taxes
This isn't a Left-Right squabble. This is a Reality-Hype squabble.
If you are bringing home exactly $250k of take home pay annually, you will not pay a single dime more than you are right now. As soon as you bring home your 250,001th dollar, that dollar will be taxed at 39% instead of 36%
So before that tax increase REALLY starts to hit your bottom line you have to be bringing in a heck of a lot more than $250k for 3c on the dollar to really hurt you and if you are actually bringing home that much money in profit, you are going to have a hard time finding anyone to feel sorry for you.
If your business cannot survive paying for the share of the commons you used to build your wealth to begin with, it has no reason to exist. If there really is a market for the service your business provides, it will be replaced by someone who CAN do it.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Sarawak, posted 03-10-2009 11:57 AM Sarawak has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 26 of 49 (502382)
03-11-2009 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by onifre
03-10-2009 7:13 PM


Bad Analogy
As they would say in the ever failing job market, "Sorry US government, we just don't have it in OUR budget to increase your pay. But, we will be evaluating your job performance in the coming years and will re-visit the idea once you have proven your worth".
That is a terrible analogy. The root of the problem stems from your disconnect of the people and its government.
We ARE the government. If the government is not successful, we are not successful. You are correct in your sentiment that just throwing money at the problem is not going to make things better. But the problem is that no matter what you say, we still have to pay for the mistakes that we made like it or not.
If you listen closely, to people who actually matter rather than talking-heads, almost NOBODY thinks that we should be cutting back spending during a recession. Even Republicans, as much as they rail against "spending", are proposing spending to solve the problem as well. They just don't call it "spending", they call it "tax cuts".

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 03-10-2009 7:13 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by onifre, posted 03-11-2009 1:30 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 49 (502385)
03-11-2009 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by kuresu
03-10-2009 4:15 AM


onifre writes:
Americans truly are blinded by advertisment.
Yes, it truly is amazing that people can be deluded into believing that their tax dollars actually go to good.
Kuresu writes:
But you know what? Those roads I drive on? Those schools I go and went to? Those police who help keep society stable and protect my property? Those firemen who do much the same? The judicial system, which allows disputes to be settled peacefully and fairly? That military that's supposed to protect us from attack? Those are all public goods that the private sector either cannot provide or will not provide or should not provide. The government has to provide them, and the government needs money to provide its services.
Roads are filled with potholes;
Schools are some of the worst in the developed world;
The police are absolutely useless;
The judicial system is a sham;
The power of the millitary gets abused;
The things you describe are NOT public goods, my friend, they are American legends as mythological as Paul Bunyan.
Far from raising taxes, the proper solution is to spend them more wisely. But the current System does not allow for such. You need a better plan; we all need a better plan. It is just too bad that no one with power to implement a better plan actually has one.
Jon

You've been Gremled!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by kuresu, posted 03-10-2009 4:15 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by kuresu, posted 03-11-2009 12:23 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 29 by Jazzns, posted 03-11-2009 12:53 PM Jon has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 28 of 49 (502399)
03-11-2009 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Jon
03-11-2009 11:58 AM


Yes, and as absolutely useless as you call those things, I suppose you don't realize that for the most part the systems actually work.
Yes, roads are full of potholes, especially Missouri. At least, it used to be that way. Then they repaved the roads. Roads need to be continuously maintained, but even a road with potholes is better than no road. Without roads, we wouldn't have anywhere near the economy we do now.
Note that its only some of the schools that are the worst: by and far most are middling, and some are actually really good public schools. But even a poor school is better than no school.
I didn't realize the police were absolutely useless. I guess you've gotten a few tickets you feel are unjustified? Tell me, who's going to solve the crimes that happen? Who's going to enforce the law? There are problems with the police, but you find structural and personnel problems in any organization--even private companies.
Is the judicial system a sham? Why? Because the jury didn't convict someone you thought deserved it? Or because they convicted someone you thought didn't deserve it? Or perhaps you feel that there shouldn't be a branch of government involved in determining whether what the other two are doing is actually legal and/or constitutional? Perhaps you feel that you shouldn't have recourse to a civil court when you need to sue someone for damages because of some event? Or perhaps that criminal court shouldn't exist so the state can try that person who killed your mother. Yeah, let's leave justice in the hands of the people and return to vigilantes.
The power of the military does get abused, but who is going to actually protect us? You might say we have no threats, but I seem to recall the national guard being mobilized after natural disasters. Occasionally even the federal reserve. Further, suppose we are actually attacked in some manner? You know, like Pearl Harbor, or Ft. Sumter, or whenever one of our commercial shipping vessels is attacked by pirates.
These public goods are not american myths. They actually, believe it or not, built this country. People talk about all this waste. And the only thing I see ever brought up are earmarks. Aside from dronestar's favored Iraq war spending, where exactly is all the unwise spending? Why can no one actually bring up anything concrete? And as I said earlier, just how much does it amount to? 5% of the budget? 10%? 2%? And for kickers, just how wasteful is private business spending? We can see what a great job the private market did: spent so unwisely they brought the economy crashing down. Haven't seen the US do that yet.
ABE: If you really think that our tax dollars do no good, I suggest you check out what life is like in failed states, where there is no functioning government. You know, like Somalia. Because without tax revenue, no government could exist, and while we wouldn't be quite so bad as Somalia, we would still be in anarchy. And anarchy is very insecure: you would see the collapse of any meaningful economy as no one would have enough trust in each other to actually carry out economic activity. That's the funny thing. People rail against taxes, and how the money is spent, without realizing that without taxes we would be in anarchy, and they overestimate the actual amount of graft that happens.
Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Jon, posted 03-11-2009 11:58 AM Jon has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by onifre, posted 03-11-2009 1:49 PM kuresu has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 29 of 49 (502409)
03-11-2009 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Jon
03-11-2009 11:58 AM


What would you do without them?
Yes, it truly is amazing that people can be deluded into believing that their tax dollars actually go to good.
Roads are filled with potholes
Okay, lets have the government stop building roads. Would you like to know what kind of effect that would have on the economy?
Schools are some of the worst in the developed world
So lets shut them down then and send our country into the 3rd world.
The police are absolutely useless
Lets get rid of them. You can hire your own personal bodyguard for constant protection.
The judicial system is a sham
So go ahead and enforce your own contracts. Presumably without the courts you would have to fall back upon force. Perhaps your personal bodyguards who you hired to protect yourself now that the police are gone would also go bust some guts if you payed them some more.
Surely the 30-40% of your income you are now saving on not paying the government to do those things would cover all of that, including the wear and tear on your new all-terrain vehicle which is now required to get anywhere.
That is of course unless you are poor in which case you are just screwed.
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Jon, posted 03-11-2009 11:58 AM Jon has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 49 (502416)
03-11-2009 1:13 PM


Huh? Neither of you people make sense.

You've been Gremled!

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by kuresu, posted 03-11-2009 1:22 PM Jon has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024