Stop Raising Interest Rates And Tariffs For Problems Created By Corporations. There's A Better Way

skews13

Diamond Member
Mar 18, 2017
9,449
11,876
2,265
A short segue: Inflation is generally caused by too much money chasing too few available goods and services. The truth is that most of our shortages, if any, are manufactured by manipulative corporations (cutting production/distribution of oil is the perfect example) or by corporate ineptitude (e.g., offshoring coupled with just-in-time inventory).

The progressive perspective suggests a paradigm shift in addressing these economic problems. The government could subsidize American steel production rather than penalize consumers with higher costs and restrict economic activity. This would lower the cost of domestic steel, making it more competitive without imposing additional financial burdens on consumers. Furthermore, such a strategy would keep economic activity buoyant and maintain money circulation within the U.S., potentially leading to higher production volumes and employment in the steel industry.

Another innovative proposal is the idea of taxing corporate profits that are seen as contributing to inflation. The tax revenue generated could then be redistributed to Americans, offsetting the higher costs imposed by corporate pricing strategies. This approach alleviates the financial strain on consumers and holds corporations accountable for their role in economic inflation.

If the corporate sector decides to penalize the market by creating scarcity, we, the people, must give them the option to be responsible citizens or penalized. We should remember that corporations used to have charters of existence for a limited time for a purpose beneficial to society. If they cannot behave for societal good, their inexistence is preferable.


Nice company you got there. Be a real shame if something happened to it.
 
A short segue: Inflation is generally caused by too much money chasing too few available goods and services. The truth is that most of our shortages, if any, are manufactured by manipulative corporations (cutting production/distribution of oil is the perfect example) or by corporate ineptitude (e.g., offshoring coupled with just-in-time inventory).

The progressive perspective suggests a paradigm shift in addressing these economic problems. The government could subsidize American steel production rather than penalize consumers with higher costs and restrict economic activity. This would lower the cost of domestic steel, making it more competitive without imposing additional financial burdens on consumers. Furthermore, such a strategy would keep economic activity buoyant and maintain money circulation within the U.S., potentially leading to higher production volumes and employment in the steel industry.

Another innovative proposal is the idea of taxing corporate profits that are seen as contributing to inflation. The tax revenue generated could then be redistributed to Americans, offsetting the higher costs imposed by corporate pricing strategies. This approach alleviates the financial strain on consumers and holds corporations accountable for their role in economic inflation.

If the corporate sector decides to penalize the market by creating scarcity, we, the people, must give them the option to be responsible citizens or penalized. We should remember that corporations used to have charters of existence for a limited time for a purpose beneficial to society. If they cannot behave for societal good, their inexistence is preferable.


Nice company you got there. Be a real shame if something happened to it.

The government could subsidize American steel production rather than penalize consumers with higher costs and restrict economic activity. This would lower the cost of domestic steel, making it more competitive without imposing additional financial burdens on consumers.

Spending tax payer dollars to subsidize steel doesn't impose additional financial burdens on consumers? That's hilarious!

Another innovative proposal is the idea of taxing corporate profits that are seen as contributing to inflation.

Stop it, you're killing me!
If you're reducing corporate profits, do you think a corporation will produce more output or less?

If the corporate sector decides to penalize the market by creating scarcity, we, the people, must give them the option to be responsible citizens or penalized.

If you don't produce enough, we'll put you out of business!!!

Nice company you got there. Be a real shame if something happened to it.

It worked for the USSR, eh comrade?
 
A short segue: Inflation is generally caused by too much money chasing too few available goods and services. The truth is that most of our shortages, if any, are manufactured by manipulative corporations (cutting production/distribution of oil is the perfect example) or by corporate ineptitude (e.g., offshoring coupled with just-in-time inventory).

The progressive perspective suggests a paradigm shift in addressing these economic problems. The government could subsidize American steel production rather than penalize consumers with higher costs and restrict economic activity. This would lower the cost of domestic steel, making it more competitive without imposing additional financial burdens on consumers. Furthermore, such a strategy would keep economic activity buoyant and maintain money circulation within the U.S., potentially leading to higher production volumes and employment in the steel industry.

Another innovative proposal is the idea of taxing corporate profits that are seen as contributing to inflation. The tax revenue generated could then be redistributed to Americans, offsetting the higher costs imposed by corporate pricing strategies. This approach alleviates the financial strain on consumers and holds corporations accountable for their role in economic inflation.

If the corporate sector decides to penalize the market by creating scarcity, we, the people, must give them the option to be responsible citizens or penalized. We should remember that corporations used to have charters of existence for a limited time for a purpose beneficial to society. If they cannot behave for societal good, their inexistence is preferable.


Nice company you got there. Be a real shame if something happened to it.
Said no economist ever.

I've heard everything now. :cuckoo:

Egberto Willies-Activist, Host, Podcaster, Blogger, Author......not an economist

Thank you once again Daily Kos.
:laughing0301:
 
A short segue: Inflation is generally caused by too much money chasing too few available goods and services. The truth is that most of our shortages, if any, are manufactured by manipulative corporations (cutting production/distribution of oil is the perfect example) or by corporate ineptitude (e.g., offshoring coupled with just-in-time inventory).

The progressive perspective suggests a paradigm shift in addressing these economic problems. The government could subsidize American steel production rather than penalize consumers with higher costs and restrict economic activity. This would lower the cost of domestic steel, making it more competitive without imposing additional financial burdens on consumers. Furthermore, such a strategy would keep economic activity buoyant and maintain money circulation within the U.S., potentially leading to higher production volumes and employment in the steel industry.

Another innovative proposal is the idea of taxing corporate profits that are seen as contributing to inflation. The tax revenue generated could then be redistributed to Americans, offsetting the higher costs imposed by corporate pricing strategies. This approach alleviates the financial strain on consumers and holds corporations accountable for their role in economic inflation.

If the corporate sector decides to penalize the market by creating scarcity, we, the people, must give them the option to be responsible citizens or penalized. We should remember that corporations used to have charters of existence for a limited time for a purpose beneficial to society. If they cannot behave for societal good, their inexistence is preferable.


Nice company you got there. Be a real shame if something happened to it.
GibsDatMan.jpg
 
Spending tax payer dollars to subsidize steel doesn't impose additional financial burdens on consumers? That's hilarious!
No it does not because it increases the tax base and expands the markets.
This is what China does that we bitch about.
 
No it does not because it increases the tax base and expands the markets.
This is what China does that we bitch about.

No it does not because it increases the tax base and expands the markets.

We could do that with everything and triple our GDP. Brilliant!
 
They would have no incentive to produce less.

You come to my office and cut my salary by 30% (or whatever number this moron fantasizes), am I going to kill myself working extra hours or am I going to cut back?

If you cut my company's profit, am I going to expand operations and put on a third shift,
or am I going to reduce hours and order less from my suppliers?

You leftists are so fucking clueless when it comes to incentives and economics.
 

Forum List

Back
Top