Deficit Panel Recommends 75% Spending Cuts, 25% Tax Increases

[MaggieMae]

i dont dig it. i'm ok with more taxes so long as expensiblility rises. they aim to lower both like idiots. the capital gains hike is sensible, but i think deductability for investment should be thrown in as a plus-side.

The intent is to lower the base tax rates BUT eliminate the huge exemptions (and subsidies, I hope). How many billions collectively are written off every year? If that money was included included in net income, it would also be much fairer. It's the main reason why many millionnaires are able to pay little or no income tax at all by zeroing out their net income as a result of enormous tax benefits.

the vast majority of expensible or deductible expenditures are inputs into the economy. through offering these deductions, the government endorses activity which builds the economy and employment situation itself. i think the idea that many (if that means a significant amount) millionaires pay little or no income tax is delusional in light of most of the country's trillion dollar tax revenue coming from high earners. i believe you are referring in fact to corporation tax.

Which ones on Schedule A are valuable inputs to the economy?

 

[mdn2000]

It all depends upon the levels of the marginal rates and if they also get rid of the inane ATM and marriage penalties.

one sales tax, 10%, this eliminates marriage penalties.

Sales tax never had a marriage penalty - income taxes do.

Never stated that, I stated if we eliminated the income tax we eliminate marriage penalties. One sales tax, no other tax on income, property, nothing, spend a buck, tax a buck, that is neutral, fair, just.

The government does not need to know my marital status, if I own a house, or if I have medical problems, all tracked through tax returns and my deductions.

 

[mdn2000]

It all depends upon the levels of the marginal rates and if they also get rid of the inane ATM and marriage penalties.

one sales tax, 10%, this eliminates marriage penalties.

You will need a sales tax of 30% to make up for the loss in income tax revenue. That should put a damper on retail sales

No, we need a sales tax of 10%, grow the economy large enough to make up the difference. (federal income tax is 45% including social security, add state another 15%, sales tax another 5%, property tax 1%, mandatory insurance 10%, government regulated electrical rates 15%).

 

[mdn2000]

brazil's and china's economies are different than the US and other developed nations. with respect to trade and commerce they are based in converse functions to our own. it has been decades since the US has been deeply merchantilist. while production of goods in the US eclipses that of brazil, it is not the basis of our economy and should not be treated as such but to the detriment of our economy as a whole. that's the detriment you propose with your tariffs idea.

Nice post, sounds smart, except the basis of our economy is manufacturing. Our years as the worlds leader in manufacturing and heavy industry is what built up such great wealth its still being spent today.

Now without that base in our economy we are collapsing.

Some people only aspire to a simple manufacturing job, without those jobs these people will always be unemployed.

As far as Brazil goes they strive to be like the USA.

China, I will work with the Chinese in two weeks. Its fun to pick their brains but they live in a vacuum, they really dont know much about whats happening in their own country.

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

I see the validity of your points, my point is different.

For decades Manufacturing was a corner stone of our economy, a tremendous amount of capital created, so much so we are still spending that capital. That capital is what is being spent today, its still keeping us going, slowly disappearing, thats why this recession is not disappearing.

The sixth largest economy of the world was in Detroit, manufacturing and industry, that is gone, the wealth that created is held as stock, securities, in bank accounts, homes, boats, jewelery, countless instruments of value, as the baby boomers retire the are spending the accumulated wealth of their work in manufacturing, that is what pays for the "service economy".

Once that money is gone, which is soon, all hell will break loose.

You may disagree, no big deal, the only way will now who is right is if you can buy all you ever dreamed of, if I can, if I have money in the bank and can take a great vacation.

Can all of you go out and spend money as you like, if not maybe its the lost of manufacturing that hurt. If you dont drive a Corvette maybe tariffs are not helping. Never been to Europe on vacation, good thing there are no tariffs.

South Korea refuses to allow import of cars made in the USA, we allow South Korea complete access to our markets, with no tariffs.

No tariffs, sound really smart.

 

[mdn2000]

Nice thought, but tariffs always lead to disaster.

I like the commission recommendations as a good start, killing UHC and a few other budget-busters (Bush's prescription benefit for example). I also liked Wellstone's going after off-shore tax cheats. especially Swiss bank accounts, what ever happened to Obama's effort with the Swiss accounts? I heard a few news blurbs...then nothing?!

Tariffs lead to disaster, yet the third worlds largest economy, Brazil has tariffs and taxes on imports. So, if your right, sometime we will see that disaster in Brazil, not saying your wrong for I know that countries can change overnight.

Political commissions, the politicians have never spent less, never, they will never reduce spending. Its political double speak.

One tax, 10%, spend a buck, get taxed on a buck

The problem with the simplicity of that is that how many times does that buck get passed through different hands, and should it be taxed each time? It's the same dollar, after all, and somebody's profit every step of the way. That's what a value added tax is all about. (A totally unworkable system, loaded with the potential for fraud.)

The sales tax already exists, just as you state, today a dollar is taxed when its made, each dollar I make is taxed 7.5% that the company pays to social security, I pay the other 7.5%,

From then on, whats left is taxed the same each time it changes hand, that tax is paid on the same dollar over and over and over.

So your fear is real and is happening today. What I propose makes it very clear to all how much we are taxed. That information should be simple and clear, as in one simple tax when a buck is spent.

How about the CRV, Californian Redemption Value, is that a fee, a tax, or money paid to a consumer.

Tax is a bad word, lets call it a fee, a fee is now known as the same as a tax, let call it a value, I am taxed on water I buy at 7/11 and its called a "Value".

The only problem in the USA is the purposely convoluted collection (stealing) of money by the greedy in power.

 

[mdn2000]

brazil's and china's economies are different than the US and other developed nations. with respect to trade and commerce they are based in converse functions to our own. it has been decades since the US has been deeply merchantilist. while production of goods in the US eclipses that of brazil, it is not the basis of our economy and should not be treated as such but to the detriment of our economy as a whole. that's the detriment you propose with your tariffs idea.

Nice post, sounds smart, except the basis of our economy is manufacturing. Our years as the worlds leader in manufacturing and heavy industry is what built up such great wealth its still being spent today.

Now without that base in our economy we are collapsing.

Some people only aspire to a simple manufacturing job, without those jobs these people will always be unemployed.

As far as Brazil goes they strive to be like the USA.

China, I will work with the Chinese in two weeks. Its fun to pick their brains but they live in a vacuum, they really dont know much about whats happening in their own country.

So why is it that certain political factions will fight tooth and nail any attempt at advancing the one manufacturing discipline where we already KNOW we can excel at if only the startup funding was made available? Energy alternatives. The popup private sector businesses that would be derived from an all-out effort to L.E.A.D would be as huge as the Apollo Project of the 60's and continuing to this day. But noooooooo, drill baby drill.

I fight it because its a transfer of wealth mandated by government rules, regulations, and laws.

Its called Marxism. I pay higher mandated electric bills, 300-500$ a month, this will go higher do to Energy Alternatives, all energy alternatives use more energy than the what you suppose they will replace. Energy alternatives are 100% dependent on petroleum. In fact we must use much more petroleum to build these monsters of ideas.

We must drill to supply the oil needed to make the cement to make the worlds largest wind farm that will produce less electricity than the smallest fossil fuel plant, drill baby drill, just use all the oil, all of it, to cover the earth with windmills, not only the surface but we will drill and drill and put wind turbines in space.

The largest meaning physically large, energy wise alternatives are proven failures, the weakest, smallest forms of energy.

Alternative energy, Marxism, inadvertent or a plan.

 

[antagon]

No, we need a sales tax of 10%, grow the economy large enough to make up the difference. (federal income tax is 45% including social security, add state another 15%, sales tax another 5%, property tax 1%, mandatory insurance 10%, government regulated electrical rates 15%).

i simply don't believe that tax burden amounts to 91% of most people's income. even in one of the higher tax brackets, i dont think i have ever paid as much as 45% of my income in federal income tax for starters. absurdity?

how do you feel a federal sales tax could be adapted with the US constitution's limitations on tax/reg on intrastate commerce? do you recognize that sales taxes target commerce which constitutes the majority of economic activity? how is such an idea preferred to the current system?

can you tie your tax proposal to exceptional growth, or do you just interject that after the tax proposal, rhetorically?

 

[antagon]

Nice post, sounds smart, except the basis of our economy is manufacturing. Our years as the worlds leader in manufacturing and heavy industry is what built up such great wealth its still being spent today.

Now without that base in our economy we are collapsing.

Some people only aspire to a simple manufacturing job, without those jobs these people will always be unemployed.

As far as Brazil goes they strive to be like the USA.

China, I will work with the Chinese in two weeks. Its fun to pick their brains but they live in a vacuum, they really dont know much about whats happening in their own country.

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

I see the validity of your points, my point is different.

For decades Manufacturing was a corner stone of our economy, a tremendous amount of capital created, so much so we are still spending that capital. That capital is what is being spent today, its still keeping us going, slowly disappearing, thats why this recession is not disappearing.

The sixth largest economy of the world was in Detroit, manufacturing and industry, that is gone, the wealth that created is held as stock, securities, in bank accounts, homes, boats, jewelery, countless instruments of value, as the baby boomers retire the are spending the accumulated wealth of their work in manufacturing, that is what pays for the "service economy".

Once that money is gone, which is soon, all hell will break loose.

You may disagree, no big deal, the only way will now who is right is if you can buy all you ever dreamed of, if I can, if I have money in the bank and can take a great vacation.

Can all of you go out and spend money as you like, if not maybe its the lost of manufacturing that hurt. If you dont drive a Corvette maybe tariffs are not helping. Never been to Europe on vacation, good thing there are no tariffs.

South Korea refuses to allow import of cars made in the USA, we allow South Korea complete access to our markets, with no tariffs.

No tariffs, sound really smart.

i drive a corvette an '86 corvette love it, though. i dont think everyone's ability to go out and buy corvettes and take vacations has ever been the case in the US. the likelihood is higher now than ever that we can, however. certainly at the height of industrial america such would be unobtainable.

i feel both tariffs and quotas are damaging to the economies which enact them. i see the purpose of an economy is to enrich the wealth and facilitate the pursuit of happiness of the society which empowers it, not the other way around. this is why i dont see korea, china, brazil or mexico as economies with merits that are worthy of emulating. one of the major ways such economies compromise the function that i feel they are charged with is through these restrictions on consumption. additionally, the labor practices and standards work converse to my perspective: in china people work for the economy, rather than the economy working for them.

as for the US and your argument on manufacture, i think you would have to establish that there actually has been serious losses to manufacture in the US. instead, i feel that heavy manufacturing in detroit has given way to light manufacturing elsewhere. is it that you think heavy manufacturing like our steel industry is the specific sort of activity which will improve our economy?

your observation is based on an idea that manufacture dollars in the economy have decreased, but they haven't. apart from that, the broader idea that the source of revenue for service consumption are roll-overs from an era where manufacturing was the dominant sector in the economy is not supported. i feel wealth is created largely through the application of labor, combined with salesmanship and innovation as the major factors. these factors continue to constitute profit in the wake of manufacture being the major sector of our economy. i argue, in fact, that every dollar spent for services is more purely constituted by these factors, than the same dollars spent on manufacture whereby commodities account for a greater share of the market price.

my point is that services put more money in more hands now than manufacture ever did, and this is supportable by the volume of our economy having expanded these sectors in the last 50-60 years. i dont think that your economic decline observation is supportable... certainly not on account of manufacturing.

 

[mdn2000]

Once that money is gone, which is soon, all hell will break loose.

You may disagree, no big deal, the only way will now who is right is if you can buy all you ever dreamed of, if I can, if I have money in the bank and can take a great vacation.

Can all of you go out and spend money as you like, if not maybe its the lost of manufacturing that hurt. If you dont drive a Corvette maybe tariffs are not helping. Never been to Europe on vacation, good thing there are no tariffs.

South Korea refuses to allow import of cars made in the USA, we allow South Korea complete access to our markets, with no tariffs.

No tariffs, sound really smart.

i drive a corvette an '86 corvette love it, though. i dont think everyone's ability to go out and buy corvettes and take vacations has ever been the case in the US. the likelihood is higher now than ever that we can, however. certainly at the height of industrial america such would be unobtainable.

i feel both tariffs and quotas are damaging to the economies which enact them. i see the purpose of an economy is to enrich the wealth and facilitate the pursuit of happiness of the society which empowers it, not the other way around. this is why i dont see korea, china, brazil or mexico as economies with merits that are worthy of emulating. one of the major ways such economies compromise the function that i feel they are charged with is through these restrictions on consumption. additionally, the labor practices and standards work converse to my perspective: in china people work for the economy, rather than the economy working for them.

as for the US and your argument on manufacture, i think you would have to establish that there actually has been serious losses to manufacture in the US. instead, i feel that heavy manufacturing in detroit has given way to light manufacturing elsewhere. is it that you think heavy manufacturing like our steel industry is the specific sort of activity which will improve our economy?

your observation is based on an idea that manufacture dollars in the economy have decreased, but they haven't. apart from that, the broader idea that the source of revenue for service consumption are roll-overs from an era where manufacturing was the dominant sector in the economy is not supported. i feel wealth is created largely through the application of labor, combined with salesmanship and innovation as the major factors. these factors continue to constitute profit in the wake of manufacture being the major sector of our economy. i argue, in fact, that every dollar spent for services is more purely constituted by these factors, than the same dollars spent on manufacture whereby commodities account for a greater share of the market price.

my point is that services put more money in more hands now than manufacture ever did, and this is supportable by the volume of our economy having expanded these sectors in the last 50-60 years. i dont think that your economic decline observation is supportable... certainly not on account of manufacturing.

I see the validity of much that you state. I think your mistaking a tax on imports as I state with "emulating" the entire economy of said nations. I do not advocate emulating China, Brazil, or any other country.

I do see merit in growing industry here, if you do not so be it. Is it possible there is an advantage in leading the world in steel production or being able to machine a piece of steel that weighs 30 tons.

One day importing things from countries that pollute will bite us in the ass, who is to say we will not be sued in the world court and be forced to pay for the damage we caused consuming the products that are polluting China.

We can clean up the earth by manufacturing things here, I dont believe in Global Warming, I do believe in polluting less, we can only do that ourselves, trusting others in China, impossible.

A tariff or tax on imports will go a long way when we are forced to clean the environment in China we are undeniably destroying.

Further if we are forced to pay tax on things we buy why should corporations be able to buy equipment from overseas tax free.

I pay tax on my car.

Why should Chevron and the German company Siemens pay no tariff or tax on the components they import for the worlds largest solar power plant in Blythe California.

If everything I buy is taxed and corporations are the problem why do you think they should pay no tax or tariff on equipment they import.

 

[antagon]

i am all for growing industry, i just dont feel that tariffs or quotas have ever been shown to do that. i also think that adapting a tariff/quota approach has to come along with some of the same characteristics of mercantile economies, or there will be a risk of what i describe as burning the candle at both ends.

here's how i see one end of the candle: starting in the late 19th century, clear through the 1950s, the US transitioned from operating the economy like these developing nations, adapting our current perspective. people describe this as 'free market' but that shoe does not fit. what really happened was that prior to this transformation, we had a free labor and production market with a tariffed and restricted trade market. china mode. we transitioned away from that through market restrictions which include tariffs and quotas on production. these tariffs serve what i described as being the purpose for the economy within society. they include the minimum wage and prevailing wage. quotas on production include the 40-hour work week with overtime analogous to a quota-premium. welfare and entitlements apply market pressure to wages further, by making it hard to pay less than the dole should an employer aim to hire a mother. as policies, all of them facilitate making an economy work for the society instead of the inverse.

the other end of the candle is the opportunity for the empowered citizens to express their consumer power with less restriction and less tax. this is a big bonus for business and industry which could afford the burdens of labor standards because of the profitability availed through commerce in such an empowered consumer market. I feel that sales taxes, tariffs and quotas burn this end of the candle. we've used this method through the first 120 years of the republic, and really put it to test before an epiphany in the 1940s on matters of labor, trade and economics. we know better than to revert to these practices, and could use innovation rather than regressive conservatism to effect a demonstration that china and korea actually are idiots for going down a marginally effective pathway to economic development.

 

[antagon]

btw, **** the world court and all that bullshit. one thing we might agree on is the fact that this global this and that is a long way from superseding national interests in practice. after all, who enforces all that shit if not US blood sweat and tears? i say we make policy decisions in our interest and that of our constituents. i just don't feel tariffs and quotas are the ticket.

 

[editec]

brazil's and china's economies are different than the US and other developed nations. with respect to trade and commerce they are based in converse functions to our own. it has been decades since the US has been deeply merchantilist. while production of goods in the US eclipses that of brazil, it is not the basis of our economy and should not be treated as such but to the detriment of our economy as a whole. that's the detriment you propose with your tariffs idea.

Nice post, sounds smart, except the basis of our economy is manufacturing. Our years as the worlds leader in manufacturing and heavy industry is what built up such great wealth its still being spent today.

Now without that base in our economy we are collapsing.

Some people only aspire to a simple manufacturing job, without those jobs these people will always be unemployed.

As far as Brazil goes they strive to be like the USA.

China, I will work with the Chinese in two weeks. Its fun to pick their brains but they live in a vacuum, they really dont know much about whats happening in their own country.

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

Your logic is circular.

Yes the mix of industries has changed that is true.

But you fail to note WHY that is true.

It is true because of FREE TRADE.

If tariffs were imposed on incoming manufactured goods, more manufacturing would be here.

 

[antagon]

Nice post, sounds smart, except the basis of our economy is manufacturing. Our years as the worlds leader in manufacturing and heavy industry is what built up such great wealth its still being spent today.

Now without that base in our economy we are collapsing.

Some people only aspire to a simple manufacturing job, without those jobs these people will always be unemployed.

As far as Brazil goes they strive to be like the USA.

China, I will work with the Chinese in two weeks. Its fun to pick their brains but they live in a vacuum, they really dont know much about whats happening in their own country.

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

Your logic is circular.

Yes the mix of industries has changed that is true.

But you fail to note WHY that is true.

It is true because of FREE TRADE.

If tariffs were imposed on incoming manufactured goods, more manufacturing would be here.

this logic is not supportable. manufacture did not regress due to the removal of tariffs. i argue that this substantiates my position that it will not benefit from reimposition of such. american industries protected by quotas and tariffs to this date do not impress me. where's booming steel in the face of our tariff regime? where's our booming shipyards in light of quotas?

protectionist mythology, man... at the expense of consumers instead of to the benefit of domestic producers.

 

[mdn2000]

No, we need a sales tax of 10%, grow the economy large enough to make up the difference. (federal income tax is 45% including social security, add state another 15%, sales tax another 5%, property tax 1%, mandatory insurance 10%, government regulated electrical rates 15%).

i simply don't believe that tax burden amounts to 91% of most people's income. even in one of the higher tax brackets, i dont think i have ever paid as much as 45% of my income in federal income tax for starters. absurdity?

how do you feel a federal sales tax could be adapted with the US constitution's limitations on tax/reg on intrastate commerce? do you recognize that sales taxes target commerce which constitutes the majority of economic activity? how is such an idea preferred to the current system?

can you tie your tax proposal to exceptional growth, or do you just interject that after the tax proposal, rhetorically?

Electric rates I should not of put in the equation, they just piss me off, with my deductions I pay less on federal and state income taxes as well. Without deductions though what I post is correct, better than 60% on the dollar.

So you do not see how a 10% tax is better than 60%.

How does one tax instead of all other taxes and fees help.

You buy property and are taxed only once, when its bought. Is there an advantage to commerce, construction, industry, home owners not having to pay property tax. You cannot see one advantage, not at all.

How about during times like today, you lose your job but your house is paid for, you have to pay 3000$ in tax if not you lose your house, your business is down as well, you need to pay property tax on your business, another 6000$. You cannot see one advantage in no property tax.

I understand your playing devil's advocate. You cannot possibly be serious.

Are you stating the current system with a few minor changes is better less of an impact on business than one simple tax.

My friend just paid state tax in 42 states, he gets income from a mall or two in 42 different states, he has a tax expert he pays, still it took two weeks of work for him to get his records together for each return, review everything, etc. etc.

You cannot see one advantage.

Are you aware the constitution has been amended to accommodate the current tax code. We can repeal and amend, as was done to get us in this mess to begin with.

 

[antagon]

no, no advantage seen. not playing devils advocate. i think the existing tax system targets a preferred source than your sales tax proposal. i think the 10% is entirely arbitrary, but welcome you to substantiate how it is founded in any assessment of revenue parity.

i dont think the federal government can do anything about state and local taxes like property tax, state income and sales taxes. your solution of a fed sales tax does not negate those. the proposal does not have basic applicability to the US because i dont see it as being compatible with our constitution or federal layout. it also functions to burn the side of the candle which i feel should go in the candlestick holder. it doesn't jive to promote industry one way and then burden consumption the other. the latter is the goal which inspires industrial production and investment in the first place.

 

[mdn2000]

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

Your logic is circular.

Yes the mix of industries has changed that is true.

But you fail to note WHY that is true.

It is true because of FREE TRADE.

If tariffs were imposed on incoming manufactured goods, more manufacturing would be here.

this logic is not supportable. manufacture did not regress due to the removal of tariffs. i argue that this substantiates my position that it will not benefit from reimposition of such. american industries protected by quotas and tariffs to this date do not impress me. where's booming steel in the face of our tariff regime? where's our booming shipyards in light of quotas?

protectionist mythology, man... at the expense of consumers instead of to the benefit of domestic producers.

I never said manufacture regressed due to the removal of tariffs. I did not propose to protect industry with tariffs.

Are you stating steel died do to tariffs.

Quotas killed shipyards, is that what you are stating.

Free trade, we have free trade with South Korea, China, the foreign markets are open and free to our products. Not at all.

So nothing is wrong but a bit of tweaking of tax code.

If we want to save the current social security system and pay for the retirement of government employees we will need an economy that is much larger than todays. Obviously everything done in the past is a complete failure. Everything. We are flat ass broke.

We are so broke the current president is shattering records borrowing money and printing money.

We can fix this without growing the economy, by having a shortage of energy, by continuing with the loss of jobs to china and the rest of world.

So far, everything is a failure, the USA sucks. This is just the beginning. Republicans will not fix this. Not at all, Democrats will do everything that will worsen the situation. Banks, Wall Street, and the Corporations will do everything to fatten their pockets up so they survive.

We will have no choice. Its the end.

We are simply continuing the same policies with the same politicians who know nothing. People got their noses so deep in economic books they have lost sight of an economy is based simply on a man digging a trench with a shovel, the corporation that makes the shovel, etc., etc..

If we do not take the power to tax, collect fees, to constantly make changes, to print money at will, to borrow, than human nature will always become corrupted and take advantage of their power to make themselves filthy rich.

 

[Toro]

i feel both tariffs and quotas are damaging to the economies which enact them. i see the purpose of an economy is to enrich the wealth and facilitate the pursuit of happiness of the society which empowers it, not the other way around. this is why i dont see korea, china, brazil or mexico as economies with merits that are worthy of emulating. one of the major ways such economies compromise the function that i feel they are charged with is through these restrictions on consumption. additionally, the labor practices and standards work converse to my perspective: in china people work for the economy, rather than the economy working for them.

Those countries are developing nations. Developing nations follow a trajectory that is different than developed countries. Korea, China, Brazil are countries which are very much worth emulating (from an economic standpoint) if you are a dirt poor country and want to lift yourself out of poverty. Remember, Korea and the other Asian Tigers had the same standard of living as a typical country in Africa 50 years ago. Africa has stagnated while the Asian Tigers are becoming a part of the developed world.

 

[antagon]

i feel both tariffs and quotas are damaging to the economies which enact them. i see the purpose of an economy is to enrich the wealth and facilitate the pursuit of happiness of the society which empowers it, not the other way around. this is why i dont see korea, china, brazil or mexico as economies with merits that are worthy of emulating. one of the major ways such economies compromise the function that i feel they are charged with is through these restrictions on consumption. additionally, the labor practices and standards work converse to my perspective: in china people work for the economy, rather than the economy working for them.

Those countries are developing nations. Developing nations follow a trajectory that is different than developed countries. Korea, China, Brazil are countries which are very much worth emulating (from an economic standpoint) if you are a dirt poor country and want to lift yourself out of poverty. Remember, Korea and the other Asian Tigers had the same standard of living as a typical country in Africa 50 years ago. Africa has stagnated while the Asian Tigers are becoming a part of the developed world.

i argue that asian economies have profited from inward investment in infrastructure, where african economies have seen the infrastructure go in the opposite direction in the same 50 years. the caveat that developing nations follow a pattern attractive to undeveloped nations is important, as it is just a caveat. developed nations cannot glean benefits from digressing policy to mercantilism.

 

[editec]

you could be forgiven for believing that tariffs could be beneficial if your claim that our economy's basis is in manufacturing were true. it's not true, however. when i refer to 'basis', i mean sectors in the economy which are accountable for the most economic activity. the production of goods is not the basis of our economy granted that perspective.

services like construction, which i'm involved in, comprise the basis of the US economy. manufacturing has not gone away. instead we lead the world in that sector. what has happened is that services and other sectors have grown up around it and now supersede it in the share of total economic activity.

directing policy to favor manufacturing as if our economy is centered on that sector is a mistake. using tariffs to support manufacturing is a mistake, even for the mercantile economies like china which think they've got a good thing going.

Your logic is circular.

Yes the mix of industries has changed that is true.

But you fail to note WHY that is true.

It is true because of FREE TRADE.

If tariffs were imposed on incoming manufactured goods, more manufacturing would be here.

this logic is not supportable. manufacture did not regress due to the removal of tariffs.

Sure it is. I can document the erosion of our industrial base industry by industry as tariffs were lifted.

i argue that this substantiates my position that it will not benefit from reimposition of such. american industries protected by quotas and tariffs to this date do not impress me. where's booming steel in the face of our tariff regime? where's our booming shipyards in light of quotas?

You don't know much history, do you?

We starting lifting tariffs on STEEL back in the sixties.

I invite you to vist Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and see the place where there used to be the STEEL MILL that defended democracy in WWII.

That rather huge site is now a vacant lot and some parkland and some modest development.

That single mill used to employ tens of thosuands of workers who made a damned fine living.

protectionist mythology, man... at the expense of consumers instead of to the benefit of domestic producers.

Yeah, so I've heard from a lot of clueless people who don't really ever support their arguments with anything but flawed theories.

All I can tell you is if you don't know your history, then you really cannot understand TODAY.

And if you can't really understand today, you haven't a clue what tomorrow is going to become.

Go look at the balance of trade, amigo.

There's the root source (not the only problem to be sure, but the major problem) vexing our economy.

 

[antagon]

Your logic is circular.

Yes the mix of industries has changed that is true.

But you fail to note WHY that is true.

It is true because of FREE TRADE.

If tariffs were imposed on incoming manufactured goods, more manufacturing would be here.

this logic is not supportable. manufacture did not regress due to the removal of tariffs. i argue that this substantiates my position that it will not benefit from reimposition of such. american industries protected by quotas and tariffs to this date do not impress me. where's booming steel in the face of our tariff regime? where's our booming shipyards in light of quotas?

protectionist mythology, man... at the expense of consumers instead of to the benefit of domestic producers.

I never said manufacture regressed due to the removal of tariffs. I did not propose to protect industry with tariffs.

Are you stating steel died do to tariffs.

Quotas killed shipyards, is that what you are stating.

Free trade, we have free trade with South Korea, China, the foreign markets are open and free to our products. Not at all.

So nothing is wrong but a bit of tweaking of tax code.

If we want to save the current social security system and pay for the retirement of government employees we will need an economy that is much larger than todays. Obviously everything done in the past is a complete failure. Everything. We are flat ass broke.

We are so broke the current president is shattering records borrowing money and printing money.

We can fix this without growing the economy, by having a shortage of energy, by continuing with the loss of jobs to china and the rest of world.

So far, everything is a failure, the USA sucks. This is just the beginning. Republicans will not fix this. Not at all, Democrats will do everything that will worsen the situation. Banks, Wall Street, and the Corporations will do everything to fatten their pockets up so they survive.

We will have no choice. Its the end.

We are simply continuing the same policies with the same politicians who know nothing. People got their noses so deep in economic books they have lost sight of an economy is based simply on a man digging a trench with a shovel, the corporation that makes the shovel, etc., etc..

If we do not take the power to tax, collect fees, to constantly make changes, to print money at will, to borrow, than human nature will always become corrupted and take advantage of their power to make themselves filthy rich.

it is hard to know where to start with this.

first, the US is by leaps and bounds the greatest economic superpower on the planet. there is a degree which our policies are responsible for that, and tax is among them. the ideas that we need to scrap everything, that we are broke, that we suck etc are not supported. this gives me the urge to say 'go to south korea if you're on their nuts so much'. but instead, i'll say that one could learn more from seeing how things work than from how they don't. from seeing how our system works, i feel there are many elements worthy of saving and expanding to address issues. there are past policies like tariffs which have worked to create specific issues with our economy and with industry. this is what i feel deprecates them in terms of usefulness in an economy like our own.

next, yes, i think that there is a negative externality to quotas and tariffs and that the steel and shipping industries have suffered as an external result. while and because these protections made these industries more price-competitive within the market the protections controlled, the industries did not maintain competitiveness in their overall market. now, if you aren't tendering a ferry or an aircraft carrier, you are better off buying a norwegian or korean heavy work ship. the fact that these industries have gone to shit stateside is indicated by lil' norway's shipping industry outshining our own. they subsidize industry, actually helping it out directly instead of tying the hands of local consumers to protect industry bosses from an onus to invest in their businesses. we have more coastline, we're collocated to the caribbean, we have a larger workforce, more steel, cheaper energy, lower wages.. you name it. royal caribbean will commission a liner out of norway and sail it to miami to be christened.

our marketshare in each of steel and shipping has shrunken as a result of tariffs and quotas and the industry has shrunken by extension.