US Government Shutdown

[Revoltingest]

Free market doesn't exist though.

I'd rather avoid arguments about the non-existence of free markets, capitalism, socialism, communism, etc, etc. People are always decrying a preference for (or a criticism of) something by saying it doesn't exist. That's specious. I like free markets. And while such things are compromised by many interferences, it's still a wonderful component of our system. I don't need them to exist in some theoretically pure form.

Corporate feudalism is unfortunately the inevitable ending of an economy with no regulation. Too much government is bad. Too little is even worse. Historically this is simply fact.

I don't argue against this.
Perhaps you've confused me with someone who opposes regulation.
I've regularly elaborated on regulations I favor, eg, environmental protection, monopoly prevention.

If we functioned in the economy with knowledge and intentions on the macro level free market would work. However thats not how finances work.

No, that is how it works. But too many people look at economics simplisticly, as though things are supposed to operate with machine like precision. Instead, it works probabilistically on the macro level. Economics is essentially quantitative psychology, & our understanding of it is a long work in progress. Predict only general trends, & expect to be surprised.

I agree about our government. Our politicians are beyond rotten to the core. We are even worse than a free market right now. The politicians are in the pocket of the corporations so its a double slap. Were it up to me I would wipe the slate of the entire government and re-start. Or at least empty congress and the presidency and replace them with competent individuals.

That is a solution unavailable to us.
The election process favors pretty faces & simple minded pandering.
(Mystic is watching to see if I make another snarky remark about women voters. So I won't.)

I'll let you in a little secret. Its not that congress is incompetent. They aren't actually idiots. They simply don't care. Its not their job to do what we elected them to do. Its their job to pass laws that benefit them and their benefactors. I'm sure there are exceptions to this but not enough to make a difference.

Congress is a collection of elected individuals with widely varying abilities, agendas & experiences.
Incompetence is an emergent property of the system.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I'd rather avoid arguments about the non-existence of free markets, capitalism, socialism, communism, etc, etc. People are always decrying a preference for (or a criticism of) something by saying it doesn't exist. That's specious. I like free markets. And while such things are compromised by many interferences, it's still a wonderful component of our system. I don't need them to exist in some theoretically pure form.

Then don't misuse the term. You mean Capitalism. There is no word to really adequately describe what you want. Its your own personal goldy locks zone of government involvement.

I don't argue against this.
Perhaps you've confused me with someone who opposes regulation.
I've regularly elaborated on regulations I favor, eg, environmental protection, monopoly prevention.

Again its the term "free market". You mean it in a more liberal sense than its actual definition. You mean a more specific goldy locks zone. This may or may not work and its really hard to experiment with an entire economy.

No, that is how it works. But too many people look at economics simplisticly, as though things are supposed to operate with machine like precision. Instead, it works probabilistically on the macro level. Economics is essentially quantitative psychology, & our understanding of it is a long work in progress. Predict only general trends, & expect to be surprised.

No its not. If I own a lumber yard I don't decide where I buy my tires based on the economic situation between Detroit and Bejing. I decide by how cheap the tires are vs the quality I get. This is a micro level decision that has resounding effects in the economy if done in mass. Simply 'buying American" or "buying local" sometimes happens but even then its a blind process without having a full time team of economists all working together to make the decisions for these businesses. If people really wanted a healthy local town economy they wouldn't shop at wallmart. However they do even with the inherent knowledge that what they do may have negative impacts. People simply do what is best for them short term as a general rule of thumb. I often try to give businesses advice on how to buff the local economy but they don't care. They do what is best for their business and I can't blame them for that.

That is a solution unavailable to us.
The election process favors pretty faces & simple minded pandering.
(Mystic is watching to see if I make another snarky remark about women voters. So I won't.)
Congress is a collection of elected individuals with widely varying abilities, agendas & experiences.
Incompetence is an emergent property of the system.

Incompetence by our judgement. There are people that are very very very happy with congress. Though some incompetence inevitable.

 

[Revoltingest]

Then don't misuse the term. You mean Capitalism. There is no word to really adequately describe what you want. Its your own personal goldy locks zone of government involvement.

Sigh....you so misunderstand. Capitalism & free markets are both components of our system, both of which I favor. I want some optimum balance between regulation, capitalism & free markets.....a "Goldilocks Zone" if you will. A likely difference between us is that I lean more in the direction of liberty, & less towards a welfare state. Also, you're a skeleton, while I'm a groundskeeper.

Again its the term "free market". You mean it in a more liberal sense than its actual definition.

Well, I am liberal, after all.

No its not. If I own a lumber yard I don't decide where I buy my tires based on the economic situation between Detroit and Bejing. I decide by how cheap the tires are vs the quality I get. This is a micro level decision that has resounding effects in the economy if done in mass. Simply 'buying American" or "buying local" sometimes happens but even then its a blind process without having a full time team of economists all working together to make the decisions for these businesses. If people really wanted a healthy local town economy they wouldn't shop at wallmart. However they do even with the inherent knowledge that what they do may have negative impacts. People simply do what is best for them short term as a general rule of thumb. I often try to give businesses advice on how to buff the local economy but they don't care. They do what is best for their business and I can't blame them for that.

I don't see how this even remotely relates to what I posted.

Incompetence by our judgement. There are people that are very very very happy with congress. Though some incompetence inevitable.

Some people like what is happening.
I don't. It's a judgement call.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Sigh....you so misunderstand. Capitalism & free markets are both components of our system, both of which I favor. I want some optimum balance between regulation, capitalism & free markets.....a "Goldilocks Zone" if you will. A likely difference between us is that I lean more in the direction of liberty, & less towards a welfare state. Also, you're a skeleton, while I'm a groundskeeper.

Indeed. I have terrible spelling as it were and it gets worse when sleep deprived. I apologize in advance.

Well, I am liberal, after all.

I meant in taking leeway with the meaning rather than a political affiliation. But we should all be liberal by the original definition. The original meaning is far different than the "blue democrat" meaning now. Actually welfare state would be the opposite of "liberty" in some ways. Though I don't like welfare state either. I would rather propose that we find a way to provide some of the more basic services rather than actual welfare. Its been shown in studies that throwing money at people doesn't work. If you pay them to do nothing they will do nothing. However food stamps and training programs for a job force has a record of working far better.

I don't see how this even remotely relates to what I posted.

I said that people don't financially function on an economic macro level. You said they did. I showed you why not.

 

[Revoltingest]

Indeed. I have terrible spelling as it were and it gets worse when sleep deprived. I apologize in advance.

Yer spellling is finne with mee.

I meant in taking leeway with the meaning rather than a political affiliation.

I was jesting. But I believe I used commonly accepted definitions (except for "liberal", where I prefer an 18th century USistan definition).

But we should all be liberal by the original definition.

And that is how I define myself, ie, liberal in the sense of social & economic liberty.

The original meaning is far different than the "blue democrat" meaning now.

I agree.

Actually welfare state would be the opposite of "liberty" in some ways. Though I don't like welfare state either. I would rather propose that we find a way to provide some of the more basic services rather than actual welfare. Its been shown in studies that throwing money at people doesn't work. If you pay them to do nothing they will do nothing. However food stamps and training programs for a job force has a record of working far better.

We're on the same page.

I said that people don't financially function on an economic macro level. You said they did. I showed you why not.

You inferred something I didn't intend. Macro economics is an emergent property of micro economics. I'm thinking of a stochastic system.

 

[Falvlun]

Sounds vague.

You're saying a lot, but not admitting to much.

You were making incorrect assumptions about what I was saying. I was simply correcting them.

This statement hints at why you avoided this part of my post.
"What kind of business do you run, pray tell?"

I found this to be snarky and irrelevant. Rather than stoop to that level by answering it, I simply ignored it.

 

[Falvlun]

If you want to improve the middle class you have to improve the elite as well.

A rising tide will raise all boats. If you think you can sink one boat while raising another that is unrealistic.

But this is exactly what's been happening, Rev, due to the "trickle down economic" theory. The elite class has been improved at the expense of the middle class. They sunk the middle class in order to raise the super rich, with the hopes that it would somehow trickle back down.

The problem is that it hasn't worked that way. It hasn't trickled down. So since we have already raised up the elites, we need to now go back and raise up the middle class in a commensurate amount. That way they can be back on the same rising tide, and feed into each other as they should.

Right now, your tide has just raised the rich. The middle class has been stranded on the beach. We're just trying to launch those boats again.

 

[Falvlun]

The above is a classic example of "Aweseome" post !

If I can coerce (take advantage of) someone to make some money, then the money is mine." If the upper five to ten percent can coerce (take advantge of) the lower 95 to 90 percent, then the money is rightfully theirs. It is survival of the fittest and the upper 5 to ten percent, economically speaking, are the fittest or they wouldn't be the uppers. And the Devil take the hind most which is becoming a majority in the US. Saying that, "There is nothing that we can do because they have the power.", is just farting away the gift of the democracy (for the people, by the people; the majority rules; and we all get to vote) that the founders of our country gave us so that this didn't happen to us.

What is funny is that because most people are not psychic they are unaware of the deep dark anger that the average American feels fermenting in their minds and bowels because their govenment forced them to feel powerless and vulnerable. The only question is, "How is that anger going to manifest itself?" The odds are that it is going to be "class warfare". Obama started that with his tax the wealthy and the Tea Party folks gave it life when they shut down the government. "Who is the most fittest to survive, the wealty or the Amercan people?"

Right now, I would say it's the wealthy (who are American people, too, afterall). They have the means to hold out longer than the poor and middle class. They also have bought the government.

I still think the masses are too apathetic to do anything about it. Not to mention, most will realize that a mass revolt will lead to really tough circumstances in the short term, before they would slowly get better-- assuming that the revolt worked.

 

[YmirGF]

Right now, I would say it's the wealthy (who are American people, too, afterall). They have the means to hold out longer than the poor and middle class. They also have bought the government.

I still think the masses are too apathetic to do anything about it. Not to mention, most will realize that a mass revolt will lead to really tough circumstances in the short term, before they would slowly get better-- assuming that the revolt worked.

And assuming that the revolting unwashed actually knew how to govern. Assuming their policies would not have catastrophic consequences... Assuming everyone went along with the purge... Assuming they did not succeed in empowering a Stalinesque leader who grew tired with the lack of results...

 

[mystic64]

Right now, I would say it's the wealthy (who are American people, too, afterall). They have the means to hold out longer than the poor and middle class. They also have bought the government.

I still think the masses are too apathetic to do anything about it. Not to mention, most will realize that a mass revolt will lead to really tough circumstances in the short term, before they would slowly get better-- assuming that the revolt worked.

Falvlun sir you do not leave me much room for arguement . What you are saying is very true both historically speaking and politically speaking. And assuming that the Amercan people could actually work together as a group is probably also farting in the wind. And yes the wealthy are American and we should probably show compassion for them even though for the most part they do not show compassion for us.

In the past the money of the wealthy was absolutely needed to stimulate business growth and stability and economic expansion. But, with the creation of the Fed their money is no longer absolutely neccessary. And now that business is allowed to move to other countries and to use non US banks to keep its money in a lot of the wealthy's money does not contribute to the US economy anymore. The money of the elite has gone globle and has gone to where they can make the most money and pay the least amount of taxes. Yes this is good for other countries because they do not have jobs and are glad for the opportunity to work for $0.50 to $1.50 an hour and yes this does provide cheap goods for US to buy. But the money that was needed to stimulate US business in the past has to a significan extent wandered off and doesn't pay taxes. But because they are the elite and big business is "God" I guess that is ok.

So my point is that the weathy elite are for the most part not needed anymore. And if they are not slowed down in the US and probably the world the quality of our lives as peasants will depend on the wims of their compassion. All the Amercan people really need is a good leader and President Obama was suppose to be that good leader. Darn .

 

[mystic64]

And assuming that the revolting unwashed actually knew how to govern. Assuming their policies would not have catastrophic consequences... Assuming everyone went along with the purge... Assuming they did not succeed in empowering a Stalinesque leader who grew tired with the lack of results...

Boy have you wrapped everything up in a nutshell ! Ah yes, the French revolution should be a lesson to all of us along with Russian Communism (the jury is still out on the Chinese, they are attempting some interesting things).

 

[metis]

And now that business is allowed to move to other countries and to use non US banks to keep its money in a lot of the wealthy's money does not contribute to the US economy anymore. The money of the elite has gone globle and has gone to where they can make the most money and pay the least amount of taxes.

Bingo! Investment money is still moving around but more towards foreign production because of lower costs.

How to counter this as this trend will radically change the American and western landscape? One way is to increase tariffs, but that would result in a tariff war whereas the cost of goods would skyrocket. Another is to move more to a VAT, whereas foreign products would be taxed at a higher rate to more equalize the competition, and this is what some countries have successfully done in northern Europe.

To me, the movement to a global economy was a mistake, and when H. Ross Perot talked about a "great sucking sound" of jobs leaving the U.S., I fully felt that this was most likely to happen, and it has.

 

[Revoltingest]

You were making incorrect assumptions about what I was saying. I was simply correcting them.

Well, you have been difficult for me to interpret at times.

I found this to be snarky and irrelevant. Rather than stoop to that level by answering it, I simply ignored it.

You should note that I asked a very similar question of Monk Of Reason,
& took no unfair advantage of him. It even lead to pleasant discussion.
Perhaps you needlessly fear my intent, eh? I don't bite....first.

 

[esmith]

Bingo! Investment money is still moving around but more towards foreign production because of lower costs.

How to counter this as this trend will radically change the American and western landscape? One way is to increase tariffs, but that would result in a tariff war whereas the cost of goods would skyrocket. Another is to move more to a VAT, whereas foreign products would be taxed at a higher rate to more equalize the competition, and this is what some countries have successfully done in northern Europe.

Did you read what you wrote? On one hand you seem to say that increasing tariffs on good brought into the country would result in a tariff war. Then you say a VAT would be used to equalize the difference between good manufactured in the US vs goods manufactured outside of the US; that is a "tariff" not a VAT. Do you know what a VAT is? If you do not, let me attempt to explain it in simple terms. It is a "V"alue "A"dded "T"ax that is basically a "tax" that is added to the product during all facets of the manufacturing process as each individual piece is taxed and all those "taxes" are then applied to the final product. I'm probably not explaining it well enough so the following link will easily explain what a VAT is.
How the Value Added Tax Works | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation

 

[metis]

Some economists would use international tax policy to improve the U.S. trade balance. For example, Gary Hufbauer has argued that the U.S. tax system puts U.S. goods and services at a disadvantage relative to those from countries that rely more heavily on value-added taxes (VAT). A VAT is typically charged on a country’s imports, whereas its exports receive VAT rebates. That suggests that U.S. adoption of a VAT system might encourage exports relative to imports, thus improving the U.S. trade balance... -- How does the tax system impact US competitiveness?


The Value Added Tax, or VAT, in the European Union is a general, broadly based consumption tax assessed on the value added to goods and services. It applies more or less to all goods and services that are bought and sold for use or consumption in the Community. Thus, goods which are sold for export or services which are sold to customers abroad are normally not subject to VAT. Conversely imports are taxed to keep the system fair for EU producers so that they can compete on equal terms on the European market with suppliers situated outside the Union ...

For the purpose of exports between the Community and non-member countries, no VAT is charged on the transaction and the VAT already paid on the inputs of the good for export is deducted - this is an exemption with the right to deduct the input VAT, sometimes called 'zero-rating'. There is thus no residual VAT contained in the export price.
However, as far as imports are concerned, VAT must be paid at the moment the goods are imported so they are immediately placed on the same footing as equivalent goods produced in the Community. Taxable people registered for VAT will be allowed to deduct this VAT in their next VAT return... -- General overview - European commission

The media debate about the potential U.S. adoption of a value-added tax (VAT) has missed the mark. Strategically employed, a VAT can legally promote and protect domestic production of anything mined, made, grown or serviced in any country. The question is not whether the United States has new taxes, high taxes or low taxes. The question is whether the country has smart or dumb taxes in relation to promoting economic growth and international competitiveness. The value-added tax is a valuable tool used by 153 countries to gain a competitive edge in trade with the United States... -- Using a Value-Added Tax For Jobs, Health and Retirement | Trade ReformTrade Reform

 

[tytlyf]

How the Value Added Tax Works | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation

Isn't the Heritage Foundation owned by Koch Industries? They target the elderly in America on purpose.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Isn't the Heritage Foundation owned by Koch Industries? They target the elderly in America on purpose.

Not so much "owns" Heritage but they funnel money to many of these organizations....including the CATO Institute...Big Oil runs deep....:yes:

Political activities of the Koch brothers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Charles and David Koch also have been involved in, and have provided funding to, a number of other think tanks and advocacy organizations: They provided the initial funding for the Cato Institute, they are key donors to the Federalist Society, and they also support, or are members of, the Mercatus Center, the Institute for Humane Studies, the Institute for Justice, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, the Institute for Energy Research, the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment, Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the George C. Marshall Institute, the Reason Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and the Fraser Institute. As of 2011, David Koch sits on the board of directors of the Cato institute, the Reason Foundation and the Aspen Institute.

And more...and more...and more....!

 

[esmith]

Isn't the Heritage Foundation owned by Koch Industries? They target the elderly in America on purpose.

Not so much "owns" Heritage but they funnel money to many of these organizations....including the CATO Institute...Big Oil runs deep....:yes:
And more...and more...and more....!

So, it appears that neither of you are willing to learn anything just because you do not happen to like the source. You probably didn't even realize that this link was only to a site that was giving an explanation of the VAT. It is a sorry state of affairs when there are those that are so closed minded.
Have a nice day.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not so much "owns" Heritage but they funnel money to many of these organizations....including the CATO Institute...Big Oil runs deep....:yes:
Political activities of the Koch brothers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And more...and more...and more....!

It's far worse than you think! I too fund the Cato Institute.
(It helps counter the efforts of commie groups you support.)
Booooowhahhahah ahahhahhahahahhhhhhh, etc!!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

So, it appears that neither of you are willing to learn anything just because you do not happen to like the source. You probably didn't even realize that this link was only to a site that was giving an explanation of the VAT. It is a sorry state of affairs when there are those that are so closed minded.
Have a nice day.

Oh please....I merely commented on tytlyf"s post. He made the statement of who owns Heritage. All I did was respond with factual information. I didn't care to comment on VAT's as others have responded so I didn't feel to need to duplicate their efforts....