Economics

[there4eyeM]

So, the investment bubble that precipitated the latest 'crisis' was caused by what ideology?

 

[Some Guy]

Create a friendly business environment, and you will get businesses (this is not rocket science here).

Couldn't be any clearer when you look at which states are losing businesses and employment and which ones are not. Makes me wonder why i still live in Illinois.

 

[Foxfyre]

Brief aside: Mr. Foxfyre is whimpering for food so I'm off to make an early dinner. Back later. . . . . save my place here. . . . .

 

[Moonglow]

Much of the unemployed will never go back to work as long as the trade imbalanced is allowed to exists.

I agree with that and I think most Americans would as well. We need to drastically lower taxes (both corporate and income), correct trade imbalances, and look at outsourcing.

I'm a die-hard conservative, and personally, I believe that outsourcing jobs should be completely illegal unless the position over seas is in full compliance with all labor laws in the US (that includes safety, salary, work environment, etc.). Otherwise, your circumventing existing laws and that is just wrong. It would be like inviting someone on a trip to another country, murdering them, and then trying to make the case it was ok because the laws against murder only apply on US soil.

By enforcing all of the labor laws, it wouldn't make much business sense to outsource the jobs. But as it stands now, the Democrats with their anti-business policies cause the outsourcing because they want to punish businesses to death with taxes and regulations. Create a friendly business environment, and you will get businesses (this is not rocket science here). If, after that, there are still some outsourcing issues, then the next step would be to incentivise keeping jobs here with additional tax breaks or other perks.

1. Consumers need to be more motived to buying made in USA products.
2. Dollar devaluation spurs exports.
3. Lower labor costs lowers trade imbalance.
4. Special tax on all goods coming from US firms overseas exportation shipping to USA.

 

[there4eyeM]

"...like inviting someone on a trip to another country, murdering them, and then trying to make the case it was ok because the laws against murder only apply on US soil."

US law would not apply in another country, but the other country's law would.

A K.I.A. (killed in action?) made in Korea is built according to Korean labor laws. To achieve what you want, it would seem Korea would have to adopt US laws in order to sell cars in the US. Otherwise, US autoworkers' jobs are essentially 'outsourced' to another country, just not directly by US-based companies (though through investment, perhaps so).

 

[Joe Steel]

Presumably, you're implying the US should lower its tax rate.

Why?

US firms are sitting on $2T of cash they won't invest. Why should we give them more?

Instead, we should impose a surplus capital tax. Make them spend the money or give it to the government.

Who are you or anyone to "make them spend money"? It's their money, they earned it, it's their's to do with as they see fit.

You're entire statement is pure, unadulterated Communism. If you love that so much, move to Russia or Cuba. America is never going to cave to Communism/Marxism/Socialism.

Congress has a virtually unlimited power of taxation. See the US Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 8. That's not Communism. If you think it is, maybe you should move.

 

[Joe Steel]

Presumably, you're implying the US should lower its tax rate.

Why?

US firms are sitting on $2T of cash they won't invest. Why should we give them more?

Instead, we should impose a surplus capital tax. Make them spend the money or give it to the government so the government can spend it.

Do you not see the irony in what you just said? If I'm a business owner and I'm reading your posts that are demonizing me and looking to punish me, am I going to spend or am I going to sit on my money for fear that you are going to take as much of it in the future as possible? I just can't believe the left doesn't see the irony in their own philosophy. If you want business to do something for you, demonzing them and threatening them is a bad idea. Ever hear the phrase "you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar"?

Don't take this as a personal attack. It isn't. This is simply a matter of public policy.

An economy is spending. When the private sector doesn't spend, the public sector must. That spending has to be funded and that means taxes or borrowing. The debt already is a problem, so it'll have to be taxes. But whom shall we tax? The unemployed and the barely surviving (as the Romney-Ryan budget would do) or the high earners (including corporations?)

The answer should be obvious.

 

[Foxfyre]

Much of the unemployed will never go back to work as long as the trade imbalanced is allowed to exists.

I agree with that and I think most Americans would as well. We need to drastically lower taxes (both corporate and income), correct trade imbalances, and look at outsourcing.

I'm a die-hard conservative, and personally, I believe that outsourcing jobs should be completely illegal unless the position over seas is in full compliance with all labor laws in the US (that includes safety, salary, work environment, etc.). Otherwise, your circumventing existing laws and that is just wrong. It would be like inviting someone on a trip to another country, murdering them, and then trying to make the case it was ok because the laws against murder only apply on US soil.

By enforcing all of the labor laws, it wouldn't make much business sense to outsource the jobs. But as it stands now, the Democrats with their anti-business policies cause the outsourcing because they want to punish businesses to death with taxes and regulations. Create a friendly business environment, and you will get businesses (this is not rocket science here). If, after that, there are still some outsourcing issues, then the next step would be to incentivise keeping jobs here with additional tax breaks or other perks.

Whoa Rottie. I knew if we proceeded long enough in these discussion, I would find something to quarrel with you about.

I cannot go along with any form of restraint of trade applied to Americans as a means to repair the economy or other problems. I think all you would accomplish with that in an already business-unfriendly environment is to make it almost impossible for Americans to export anything and you would force many more businesses to pull up stakes lock, stock, and barrel and move elsewhere to more amicable climes. With so many emerging markets and populations that eclipse ours, any form of trade war will be disastrous for us.

Example: President Bush tried that on a tiny scale with the steel industry and damn near put our domestic steel manufacturing base out of business entirely. It just doesn't work.

No, our challenge is to install a pro-business President and Congress who will make it desirable and profitable to do business here. There really isn't any other way.

 

[freedombecki]

Some facts about the economy:

The fact is, your facts deal mostly with the ways things are and not the difference between that and the way things were. That's where the problem lies. Republicans have devasted the economy by off-shoring so much US production that the amount we have left is nowhere near enough.

Secondly, the jobs remaining pay less in adjusted dollars than what they used to pay.

And the foreign manufacturers are building factories here because they regard the US as their third world. American manufactures offshore production to sweatshops in Asia because the poor deserate slugs who live there will work in abyssmal conditions for far less than they'd get if they lived in America. European and Japanese car manufacturers are doing the same thing except that they're substituting America for Asia.

Those are the facts.

Joe? Do you have a link to these claims with a comparison between Republicans and Democrats? I'd sure like to read it, because I hadn't heard it.

 

[Joe Steel]

The fact is, your facts deal mostly with the ways things are and not the difference between that and the way things were. That's where the problem lies. Republicans have devasted the economy by off-shoring so much US production that the amount we have left is nowhere near enough.

Secondly, the jobs remaining pay less in adjusted dollars than what they used to pay.

And the foreign manufacturers are building factories here because they regard the US as their third world. American manufactures offshore production to sweatshops in Asia because the poor deserate slugs who live there will work in abyssmal conditions for far less than they'd get if they lived in America. European and Japanese car manufacturers are doing the same thing except that they're substituting America for Asia.

Those are the facts.

You're statement makes no sense. The facts show that America actually has a surplus on outsourcing (ie more jobs from other countries coming in that jobs going out to other countries). Second, we lead the world in "production".

You're literally spouting misinformation here. Third, the GOP did not "devastate" the economy. That was done by the Democrats under Bill Clinton who singed the Community Re-investment Act and collapsed our housing market by ensuring that people who couldn't afford home loans received them.

You're wrong on everything you just stated and the facts prove that.

Nothing you posted or linked supports your assertion on offshoring. Please show me why you think I am wrong.

CRA had nothing to do with collapse of the house market. That collapse was a consquence Gram-Leach-Bliley more than of any other legislation.

 

[Foxfyre]

So, the investment bubble that precipitated the latest 'crisis' was caused by what ideology?

The ideology that government can fix poverty by assigning different rules to the rich and poor. It is progressiveism at the extreme.

It started in the Carter Administration with CRA, and while the concept itself was flawed by encouraging people who couldn't afford to buy a house to buy one anyway, but at the time there was at least some common sense controls and requirements for qualifying for a loan in place. So the system wasn't too bad for quite awhile and rocked along through all of the Reagan Administration without much of a problem. Then in the Clinton Administration, Congress via Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and some others began relaxing some of the restrictions and regulation, and the GOP congress that followed were either complicit with the new rules or didn't reinstate them. Negligence and wrong headedness by both.

So that's when the housing bubble began to build when people who couldn't afford them were not only encouraged to buy houses they never should have qualified for, but encourage to buy HUGE houses they shouldn't have qualified for. This continued well into the Bush Administration.

By 2006 President Bush and his advisors were strongly pushing Congress to deal with it--asked them again and again--but Frank and Dodd kept insisting that there was no problem, Fannie and Freddie were essentially sound, no worries, yadda yadda. So when a cyclical aand what would have been a mild recessionary trend occurrred, and those houses started going into default and others started going underwater,the whole house of cards collapsed in late 2008. The rest is history.

 

[Joe Steel]

Some facts about the economy:

The fact is, your facts deal mostly with the ways things are and not the difference between that and the way things were. That's where the problem lies. Republicans have devasted the economy by off-shoring so much US production that the amount we have left is nowhere near enough.

I believe the record will show that Republicans are no more guilty of outsourcing than are Democrats. And while I'm sure you have been taught what you posted, I won't even bother challenging you to support that highly partisan statement because I know you can't do it with any credible source.

I'm certain I'd never be able to prove the statement to your satisfaction just as I'd never be able to prove evolution or global warning to you either. That doesn't mean it isn't so.

 

[Avatar4321]

Sadly the Republicans elected a progressive and Obama is already a Progressive... Looks like not will change for the US for quite sometime.

I disagree. Change doesnt occur in the White House. It occurs in our houses. Every American alive can change and influence their own life. They can change their families lives. They can change their communities. They can lift their friends an neighbors to higher ground. They can love their enemies. They can reconcile with adversaries. They can forgive those who hurt them. They can dedicate their lives to being honest, true, chaste, kind, full of love, gentle, meek, etc.

I would argue that it's the progressive mindset that teaches that the only way we can change our nation is by changing our President and government.

 

[Avatar4321]

Presumably, you're implying the US should lower its tax rate.

Why?

US firms are sitting on $2T of cash they won't invest. Why should we give them more?

Instead, we should impose a surplus capital tax. Make them spend the money or give it to the government so the government can spend it.

1) Cutting taxes dont give people any money. They allow people to keep the money that's already theirs.

2) Allowing people to keep more money encourages them to invest, create, and serve more people because it allows them to keep more of the fruits of their labor.

3) I don't see how government spending the money is going to benefit the nation. We already spend trillions of dollars we don't have and are still suffering from an economic recession that started 4 years ago. How many times do we need to throw money down the drain before we realize that allowing the government to rob the people and spend on what the politicians want doesnt generally benefit the people at large?

 

[Avatar4321]

Much of the unemployed will never go back to work as long as the trade imbalanced is allowed to exists.

How can we fix a trade imbalance if the people dont go back to work?

 

[uscitizen]

Largest manufacturer? Then why is our economy consumer spending based?
You bring up talking points but cannot see the entire picture.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm certain I'd never be able to prove the statement to your satisfaction just as I'd never be able to prove evolution or global warning to you either. That doesn't mean it isn't so.

It doesn't mean it is so either.

 

[there4eyeM]

Derivatives.

 

[Twofox]

Presumably, you're implying the US should lower its tax rate.

Why?

US firms are sitting on $2T of cash they won't invest. Why should we give them more?

Instead, we should impose a surplus capital tax. Make them spend the money or give it to the government so the government can spend it.

Do you not see the irony in what you just said? If I'm a business owner and I'm reading your posts that are demonizing me and looking to punish me, am I going to spend or am I going to sit on my money for fear that you are going to take as much of it in the future as possible? I just can't believe the left doesn't see the irony in their own philosophy. If you want business to do something for you, demonzing them and threatening them is a bad idea. Ever hear the phrase "you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar"?

Don't take this as a personal attack. It isn't. This is simply a matter of public policy.

An economy is spending. When the private sector doesn't spend, the public sector must. That spending has to be funded and that means taxes or borrowing. The debt already is a problem, so it'll have to be taxes. But whom shall we tax? The unemployed and the barely surviving (as the Romney-Ryan budget would do) or the high earners (including corporations?)

The answer should be obvious.

Joe, it's the difference between economic schools of thought. Keynsian has been the current school of thought used in the US for the last 30-50 years or so. Keynesian economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This like desribes it, and links to the other school of thought - Austrian Economics.

So long story short - Centralized planning vs let the market work it self out. We've had 30+ years of centralized management and we call can see where that's gotten us. Blaming either side is exactly what the pols want us to do, so they can keep their little party going.

 

[Foxfyre]

As long as we keep electing professional politicians who quickly become focused on increasing their own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth at our expense, we cannot expect government to address any of our economic problems. The politicians and the bureaucrats they hire are thriving and prospering by keeping the problems unsolved. That is why members of both parties are so hostile to the 9/12ers, Tea Partiers, tax reformers, and other grass roots groups that have raised up and are demanding to be heard. If they can't keep such groups marginalized and discredited, they can't keep their own gravy trains going.

Some of us keep sounding the alarm. We hope there are still enough people with eyes to see and ears to hear to heed it.