114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 11:34 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, Are you that dumb? Social security is a trust fund expense that still shows it can sustain current costs. Take that away, and what do you have? The general fund borrows that money to spend it on current expense.
In short, you have described a Ponzi Scheme.
Quote:
Unless the feds make adjustments - as we have known was needed from decades ago - that current payouts cannot be sustained over the long run.

Don't forget; both democratic and republican administrations and congress failed to "repair" it. The longer they wait, the problem becomes more acute for future beneficiaries.
True. Bush had ideas for a fix, but the Democrats demagogued it, as is typical of that party.
Quote:
According to the 2008 federal expenditure pie chart
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm, past and current military expenditure represents 54% of all expenses.
What is important is current military budgets, which show it is far less than 54%, and less than it has been historically.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 11:40 am
http://www.balloon-juice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/recession-mantras.gif

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 11:56 am
Proposed solution to our mess:

Eliminate totally the income tax and replace with a retail sales tax.
And take a machete to the federal budget, including freezing wages for federal employees.

Then wait for the economic boom to happen.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 11:57 am
@okie,
so wealthy folks can buy offshore, and poor folks can support the government...
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 11:59 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Proposed solution to our mess:

Eliminate totally the income tax and replace with a retail sales tax.

Then wait for the economic boom to happen.


Think so? What about investment income? That suddenly wouldn't be taxed at all?

I'm going to go ahead and say, no. Not a great plan.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:00 pm
@Rockhead,
Not a good assumption. Any sales to anyone living here would be subject to sales tax. Further, you could not travel outside the country and bring goods here without paying the sales tax. Also any internet sales here would require a sales tax be collected.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:01 pm
@okie,
but the poor pay as much as the rich.

assuming they can buy anything...
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:03 pm
@okie,
okie, Why is it that you continue to say things you know nothing about? Americans traveling abroad can bring back up to $800 tax free. You're not only dumb, you're stupid!

I swear, I was going to ignore you, because your opinions are usually wrong; about 90% of the time. But I can't let people believe the wrong information you spread on these threads.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:09 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I'm going to go ahead and say, no. Not a great plan.
Cycloptichorn
The plan deserves at least a good debate and hearing on a national scale.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:12 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I'm going to go ahead and say, no. Not a great plan.
Cycloptichorn
The plan deserves at least a good debate and hearing on a national scale.


Well, how do you answer even the basic question of: what about investment income? You're not going to tax it at all?

The 'plan' you talk about isn't a plan. It's a political talking point for right-wingers. ACTUAL plans have things like details or explanations.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:18 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:
but the poor pay as much as the rich.
assuming they can buy anything...
The tax can be made progressive. Exclude food. Also exclude housing to a threshold, such as rent to a threshold and purchase of a house to a threshold. Exclude medical care and insurance, at least medical insurance. Also exclude tax on utilities, at least certain ones that are essential for homes, such as electricity and gas. Also we already have enough sales tax on gasoline.

At least the idea deserves a full hearing in terms of pros and cons. It has many potential advantages, such as goods sold in the store bear the same tax burden, regardless of where they are manufactured. This alone could boost domestic production and manufacturing. Also no more breaks for illegal immigrants and others dodging income tax. Example, drug dealers pay tax when they buy stuff. The infrastructure is already there in most places, to collect local and state income tax. With barcoding, excluding food in grocery stores would be easy, It is already done in places like Colorado and it works fine. Enforcement would be easier, because instead of hundreds of millions of people to watch, we only need to watch the retailers, and a handful of them sell the vast majority of goods and services. And we already have local governments watching their tax collections for any abuse.

Bottom line, the idea deserves more consideration than it has received.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:33 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Well, how do you answer even the basic question of: what about investment income? You're not going to tax it at all?

The 'plan' you talk about isn't a plan. It's a political talking point for right-wingers. ACTUAL plans have things like details or explanations.
Cycloptichorn
That would take some thought. I hate the fact that we might have to keep a skeleton bureaucracy for the IRS for some things. We know that Social Security and Medicare will still need to be funded and collected. Some have suggested that low income people could be given an amount to make the sales tax system more progressive. After all, under the current income tax system, low earners can receive thousands of dollars. Additionally, we could still collect taxes on investment income over a pretty high threshold. I don't like the idea of double taxation, and having to report a small amount of interest on a checking account or small Certificates of Deposit for example, would be a waste of time. Perhaps the banks or financial institutions would have to report amounts over a hundred thousand or something?

I do not have a perfect outline for the plan, or ACTUAL PLAN as you say. All I am suggesting is that we need to consider it, with all the positives and negatives. Eliminating the IRS as we know it does offer a number of positive factors that could help us as a country.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:41 pm
This just in: Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) has rejected the offer of $2.8B in federal money to build a high-speed rail line connecting Orlando and Tampa. Citing concerns of cost over runs and/or revenue shortfalls which would have to be borne by the state, he joins Repub Govs in Wisconsin and Ohio in declining to accept the money.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:44 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

This just in: Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) has rejected the offer of $2.8B in federal money to build a high-speed rail line connecting Orlando and Tampa. Citing concerns of cost over runs and/or revenue shortfalls which would have to be borne by the state, he joins Repub Govs in Wisconsin and Ohio in declining to accept the money.


Here's transportation Sec. Ray LaHood:

Quote:
LaHood:

We are extremely disappointed by Governor Rick Scott’s decision to walk away from the job creating and economic development benefits of high speed rail in Florida. We worked with the governor to make sure we eliminated all financial risk for the state, instead requiring private businesses competing for the project to assume cost overruns and operating expenses. It is projects like these that will help America out-build our global competitors and lay the foundation needed to win the future. This project could have supported thousands of good-paying jobs for Floridians and helped grow Florida businesses, all while alleviating congestion on Florida’s highways. Nevertheless, there is overwhelming demand for high speed rail in other states that are enthusiastic to receive Florida’s funding and the economic benefits it can deliver, such as manufacturing and construction jobs, as well as private development along its corridors.


Is Rick Scott just lying about the State being responsible for cost overruns, or is LaHood exaggerating, or what? Considering that Scott is a known criminal with a history of lies, I'm leaning toward the former.

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:44 pm
@realjohnboy,
Speaking of the Repub Gov in Wisc... He's going after collective bargaining for public employees in a big way.

Quote:
Gov. Walker's plan
Walker's plan would make workers pay half the costs of their pensions and at least 12.6 percent of their health care premiums. State employees' costs would go up by an average of 8 percent. The changes would save the state $30 million by June 30 and $300 million over the next two years to address a $3.6 billion budget shortfall.

Unions could still represent workers, but could not seek pay increases above the Consumer Price Index unless approved by a public referendum. Unions also could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized. Local police, firefighters and state troopers would retain their collective bargaining rights. Massive protests in Madison
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:45 pm
@okie,
Quote:
I don't like the idea of double taxation


Neither does the government. It prefers treble, quadruple etc up to n-tuple.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:49 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Hmm, Cyclo. I can't explain the disparity between what Scott and LaHood said. My post was based on a story about Scott's rejection of the money.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 12:54 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

Hmm, Cyclo. I can't explain the disparity between what Scott and LaHood said. My post was based on a story about Scott's rejection of the money.


Yah, I know. I don't know how to find out the truth of the matter, but I'm looking into it today.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 01:17 pm
By the way, Okie, I am not dismissing your suggestion of a national sales tax discussion. The issue for me is that we have been there/done that on A2K before and I don't want to get into it again, particularly when it is probably very unlikely that the notion is going anywhere amongst the public and elected officials.
Here are a few bullet points, though:
> The annual IRS budget (as proposed by Obama) is $13Bn for next year.
> If we were to go that route the easiest mechanism is to make it a Value Added Tax (VAT) imposed at the producer/importer level rather then at the checkout counter.
> Someone (someone?) would decide that lettuce should have a 0% VAT vs a much higher rate on foods deemed unnecessary/unhealthy - like Twinkies.
> A VAT would eliminate most of the underground economy. If I pay my yardboy $20 to mow my lawn at my townhouse rental property and claim it as a maintenance expense, the tax gets collected if he buys Twinkies.

I appreciate that there are many variables going on but I am curious as to what you think the federal VAT might be on some mundane product that is deemed to be neither a necessity nor a luxury?
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Feb, 2011 02:08 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

My bet: "I want to cut the budget but this is not a cut I can vote for. It's a job-killer I can not vote for."


So what do I know? The House just voted to cancel the 2nd engine notion by a vote of 233-198. This contrasts with a defeat the last time around (193-231) to kill an extension. It appears that House Republican freshman defied party leaders.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 01/18/2026 at 06:10:49