What should be done, if anything, to bring home $5 trillion held overseas by American businesses?

[danielpalos]

Your article supports my argument!

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

I haven't been "listening" to anybody I'm able to read, think for myself and understand how our economy works.
We weren't talking about foreign interest, we were talking about interest. You said China owned the majority and that was incorrect. I asked who owned the rest of it and you dodged. You either didn't know that the rest of the interest was owned domestically or you were trying to avoid admitting it, but I'm not sure why you'd do that.

The conversation started with bringing foreign money back to the US and moved towards a discussion about the debt and government spending. Can't have an intelligent conversation about it if you don't understand how it works. Can't have an intelligent conversation if you act defensive and attacking when you don't know an answer. How about you put your ego aside for a minute and open yourself up to learning something. It's the same bullheaded, uncompromising, know it all attitude that you are displaying that is causing the partisan gridlock in Washington. It's toxic. Grow up.

I usually defer to, Boss or Ding, when it is about socialists refusing to "compete", like capitalists; when I just need, propaganda and rhetoric.

 

[Slade3200]

Your article supports my argument!

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

 

[Boss]

Your article supports my argument!

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

I haven't been "listening" to anybody I'm able to read, think for myself and understand how our economy works.
We weren't talking about foreign interest, we were talking about interest. You said China owned the majority and that was incorrect. I asked who owned the rest of it and you dodged. You either didn't know that the rest of the interest was owned domestically or you were trying to avoid admitting it, but I'm not sure why you'd do that.

The conversation started with bringing foreign money back to the US and moved towards a discussion about the debt and government spending. Can't have an intelligent conversation about it if you don't understand how it works. Can't have an intelligent conversation if you act defensive and attacking when you don't know an answer. How about you put your ego aside for a minute and open yourself up to learning something. It's the same bullheaded, uncompromising, know it all attitude that you are displaying that is causing the partisan gridlock in Washington. It's toxic. Grow up.

China does hold the majority of foreign held debt... you didn't prove anything wrong. I do know how economies work, when our debt maintenance grows faster than our GDP our economy will crash... There is nothing special about us. It doesn't matter who holds the debt. Now, if the debt was declining and we were living by a balanced budget, there wouldn't be a problem because we would eventually pay it off as we grew our way out. What we cannot sustain are decade after decade trillion dollar deficits every year. That just doesn't work for any economic model, no matter how smug you are.

 

[danielpalos]

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

 

[Boss]

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

More Socialist redistribution bullshit! Wealth is created! There is no "percentage of new money" ...There is just created wealth and it doesn't matter who creates it. One reason this 90% remains stagnant is because we've removed all motivation and incentive to create wealth by providing cradle to grave entitlements.

 

[Slade3200]

Like my other posts, no arguement is being presented, simply facts about how our economy works. You making claims that China owns the majority of our debt and that our countries debt is similar to a person with credit card debt shows me that you don't fully understand how these large scale economics operate.

Glad you read it.

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

I haven't been "listening" to anybody I'm able to read, think for myself and understand how our economy works.
We weren't talking about foreign interest, we were talking about interest. You said China owned the majority and that was incorrect. I asked who owned the rest of it and you dodged. You either didn't know that the rest of the interest was owned domestically or you were trying to avoid admitting it, but I'm not sure why you'd do that.

The conversation started with bringing foreign money back to the US and moved towards a discussion about the debt and government spending. Can't have an intelligent conversation about it if you don't understand how it works. Can't have an intelligent conversation if you act defensive and attacking when you don't know an answer. How about you put your ego aside for a minute and open yourself up to learning something. It's the same bullheaded, uncompromising, know it all attitude that you are displaying that is causing the partisan gridlock in Washington. It's toxic. Grow up.

China does hold the majority of foreign held debt... you didn't prove anything wrong. I do know how economies work, when our debt maintenance grows faster than our GDP our economy will crash... There is nothing special about us. It doesn't matter who holds the debt. Now, if the debt was declining and we were living by a balanced budget, there wouldn't be a problem because we would eventually pay it off as we grew our way out. What we cannot sustain are decade after decade trillion dollar deficits every year. That just doesn't work for any economic model, no matter how smug you are.

I agree about the last part. But again we weren't talking about foreign held debt when you brought up china, and I asked you directly about who holds the rest of the debt and you dodged it. When I pointed out the domestic interest holders, including retirement accounts, you resorted to petty insults.

 

[Slade3200]

Those are 'arguments' you've cajoled me into so you can apparently show off. Rather than sticking with the topic of the thread, lefties prefer to flit about from one rhetorical meme to another until complete boredom sets in where they proclaim victory.

I simply challenged the predictable lefty meme about slashing the military budget and you set out to retort your nonsense regarding debt and economics, neither of which you seem to know much about. But knowing about things isn't important to lefties, it's all about running game clock and avoiding thread topics.

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

 

[danielpalos]

The guy that claims china owns the majority of our debt and rejects the idea that American citizens, governments, and businesses own a piece of the pie, can't really do much damage by calling me an idiot.

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

It is one option. However, business is business, and most business should hire entire departments, to help them conform to rational choice theory or fill out corporate welfare forms, as the as case may require.

In my opinion, simply providing recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, can engender more entrepreneurship; than our current right wing regime of a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron.

 

[Slade3200]

China is the largest foreign holder of our debt. Right behind them is Japan. Then there are a host of other foreign governments along with some domestic holders. Why does it matter to you who holds most of our debt? It's still debt and interest still has to be paid on it. Currently, that interest amounts to about half our defense budget. You don't think it's a problem because of some kooky nonsense about the interest paying for our retirements. Sounds like you've been listening to some Keynesian blow smoke up your ass and it gave you a boner.

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

It is one option. However, business is business, and most business should hire entire departments, to help them conform to rational choice theory or fill out corporate welfare forms, as the as case may require.

In my opinion, simply providing recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, can engender more entrepreneurship; than our current right wing regime of a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron.

I see both sides of the arguement but I think our unemployment and welfare systems need major reforms. People are given to much incentive to milk the system for a paycheck instead of looking for work or starting a business. They should focus the funds more towards providing resources and creating opportunity for people to find work or start a business rather than simply writing checks.

 

[danielpalos]

Republican supply side economics are, "contra-indicated" when we have massive debt, already.

Now is when supply side economics should, "switch gears" and start supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

It is one option. However, business is business, and most business should hire entire departments, to help them conform to rational choice theory or fill out corporate welfare forms, as the as case may require.

In my opinion, simply providing recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, can engender more entrepreneurship; than our current right wing regime of a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron.

I see both sides of the arguement but I think our unemployment and welfare systems need major reforms. People are given to much incentive to milk the system for a paycheck instead of looking for work or starting a business. They should focus the funds more towards providing resources and creating opportunity for people to find work or start a business rather than simply writing checks.

Not sure what you mean. Not everyone can "start right away". Structural forms of unemployment are also, natural under capitalism.

Capital, simply must circulate to create a multiplier effect. There is no social reason for denying and disparaging capitalism, in modern times; but for right wing, "hate on the poor".

 

[Slade3200]

Another factor that needs to be considered when planning our economic policy is where our wealth and new money goes. There was a shift in the 1980s that resulted in practically all of the new money going to the top 10% of earners while the rest of the 90% stayed stagnant. Future tax and economic policy needs to consider this factor as well. It's not just all about GDP.

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

It is one option. However, business is business, and most business should hire entire departments, to help them conform to rational choice theory or fill out corporate welfare forms, as the as case may require.

In my opinion, simply providing recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, can engender more entrepreneurship; than our current right wing regime of a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron.

I see both sides of the arguement but I think our unemployment and welfare systems need major reforms. People are given to much incentive to milk the system for a paycheck instead of looking for work or starting a business. They should focus the funds more towards providing resources and creating opportunity for people to find work or start a business rather than simply writing checks.

Not sure what you mean. Not everyone can "start right away". Structural forms of unemployment are also, natural under capitalism.

Capital, simply must circulate to create a multiplier effect. There is no social reason for denying and disparaging capitalism, in modern times; but for right wing, "hate on the poor".

Im not saying do away with unemployment, I'm just saying reform and improve it. I know people who completely take advantage of our unemployment and welfare systems. I don't want to make things harder for those who are having a tough time, I want to help them, but I also think we have plenty of room to improve our systems to better help those who really need it

 

[rightwinger]

Also your understanding of economics is not very sound. You claimed that the biggest driver of our deficit was interest on the debt in response to my claim that military was by far the largest outlay of our descretioary spending budget. First off, servicing the debt costs us 230 billion and military costs us 600 billion, and second the largest driver over our debt is social security/unemployment at 1.25 Trillion

Yes, it's about a third of our defense budget and we get absolutely nothing for it. What's more, at the current deficit rates, servicing the debt is going to quickly become our primary expense. Eventually, we'll get to a point where we can't pay for social security and other non-discretionary items and also service our debt... then, the interest starts to snowball into increased debt... shortly thereafter, our entire economy collapses. This happens rapidly when it all starts coming undone.

Ah yes the famous debt cliff, scary. Question, servicing the debt that does absolutely nothing... where exactly does that money go? Can you explain?

Mostly to Chinese and Japanese banks holding our debt.

How much? Where does the rest go?

I'm sorry you don't understand how interest on debt works. It's money paid for money you borrow. We're having to borrow a trillion dollars a year to keep the lights on. Each year, that's another trillion dollars we will have to pay interest on in addition to what we're already paying. At some point we can no longer pay the interest. This isn't a theory or scare tactic, it just happened to Greece a few years ago.

What interest rate are we paying?

 

[Slade3200]

Yes, it's about a third of our defense budget and we get absolutely nothing for it. What's more, at the current deficit rates, servicing the debt is going to quickly become our primary expense. Eventually, we'll get to a point where we can't pay for social security and other non-discretionary items and also service our debt... then, the interest starts to snowball into increased debt... shortly thereafter, our entire economy collapses. This happens rapidly when it all starts coming undone.

Ah yes the famous debt cliff, scary. Question, servicing the debt that does absolutely nothing... where exactly does that money go? Can you explain?

Mostly to Chinese and Japanese banks holding our debt.

How much? Where does the rest go?

I'm sorry you don't understand how interest on debt works. It's money paid for money you borrow. We're having to borrow a trillion dollars a year to keep the lights on. Each year, that's another trillion dollars we will have to pay interest on in addition to what we're already paying. At some point we can no longer pay the interest. This isn't a theory or scare tactic, it just happened to Greece a few years ago.

What interest rate are we paying?

I've been through this with him. He thinks china owns the majority of our debt, which isn't true, and he compares us to Greece who was on the euro. #clueless

 

[danielpalos]

What is your opinion of ending the deduction for labor costs, by foreign labor employed by any expatriate US Firms or subsidiaries?

I'd be fine with that... encouraging domestic production and labor is good for our economy. I don't have a problem with taxation and regulation of the big dogs... it's small business, middle and lower classes that I think should be freed up from significant tax and regulatory burdens. We need to create as much opportunity as possible for those starting from scratch to succeed going against the big guys. Unfortunately our business environment has moved towards and "exit by acquisition" focus. Our start up business owners are just feeding the beast instead of creating sustainable businesses. It's no bueno.

It is one option. However, business is business, and most business should hire entire departments, to help them conform to rational choice theory or fill out corporate welfare forms, as the as case may require.

In my opinion, simply providing recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, can engender more entrepreneurship; than our current right wing regime of a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron.

I see both sides of the arguement but I think our unemployment and welfare systems need major reforms. People are given to much incentive to milk the system for a paycheck instead of looking for work or starting a business. They should focus the funds more towards providing resources and creating opportunity for people to find work or start a business rather than simply writing checks.

Not sure what you mean. Not everyone can "start right away". Structural forms of unemployment are also, natural under capitalism.

Capital, simply must circulate to create a multiplier effect. There is no social reason for denying and disparaging capitalism, in modern times; but for right wing, "hate on the poor".

Im not saying do away with unemployment, I'm just saying reform and improve it. I know people who completely take advantage of our unemployment and welfare systems. I don't want to make things harder for those who are having a tough time, I want to help them, but I also think we have plenty of room to improve our systems to better help those who really need it

What a coincidence, that is what I am advocating; improving the efficiency of our economy so we can lower taxes.