posted
This is what happens when you spend more money in less than 1 year than you could have ever imagined while blaming it on Bush. How on earth is a deficit blamed on Bush a justifiable way to become more dependent on Chinese money and just spend money like there is no tomorrow.
"As lawmakers toy with the idea of an across-the-board sales tax on just about everything, tax reform advocates are starting to drum up opposition with the same fervor they employed during last month's anti-tax tea parties.
The value-added tax, or VAT, as it is called, amounts to a tax-on-everything -- or TOE, for the acronym-inclined. It's a tax on goods that's applied in pieces throughout the chain of production and distribution and results in an increase in the cost of virtually everything you buy."
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Huckabee meant a flat tax instead of income. Now this looks more like an income, state sales, and federal sales tax on goods.
We got to pay for this new administration somehow.
Mortgage rates going up soon, government borrowing through the roof, we will see the byproduct of this soon enough.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I think Huckabee meant a flat tax instead of income. Now this looks more like an income, state sales, and federal sales tax on goods.
We got to pay for this new administration somehow.
Mortgage rates going up soon, government borrowing through the roof, we will see the byproduct of this soon enough.
The problems we are facing and needing to resolve through spending were not created in the first 5 months of this year. As much as you would like to close the books on the Bush era, it's just not possible.
I don't like taxes any more than the next person but Bush's administration's refusal to raise taxes in the face of the war and other situations that were occurring is directly responsible for the need to not only spend but tax our way out of it.
I know you would rather blame Obama and the Dem's for our problems but it's just not the case yet. There time will come to answer for their actions but 5 months into this administration is way to soon.
Posts: 3255 | From: Los Angeles California | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why not CUT spending on Iraq since Obama said he would begin withdrawing 1 brigade a month every month. What happened to that? All of a sudden his campaign promise is out the window.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: now they are stealing ideas from the conservatives? LOL.. what did Huckabee call it? the fair tax?
Have you researched the FAIR TAX? It's an excellent Idea. Solves a lot of problems.
well, like most economics it gets more complicated the more you think about it.
i suppose it depends on what you want out of the economy.
IF you want people to spend their money and keep GDP high? then it's a very bad idea. GDP is simply a measure of all the money spent inside the country
if you want people to save money and be a "thrifty" nation? then it's a good idea cuz it makes people more likely to not be "consumers".
most capitalists want the nation of consumers.
that's why they have sold our country to China. make no mistake about it. China has paid and is paying them very well.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Should I learn Mandarin and Cantonese now or later?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Should I learn Mandarin and Cantonese now or later?
Learn it now. Maybe we can take up a collection and get you a ticket
-------------------- It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: now they are stealing ideas from the conservatives? LOL.. what did Huckabee call it? the fair tax?
Have you researched the FAIR TAX? It's an excellent Idea. Solves a lot of problems.
well, like most economics it gets more complicated the more you think about it.
i suppose it depends on what you want out of the economy.
IF you want people to spend their money and keep GDP high? then it's a very bad idea. GDP is simply a measure of all the money spent inside the country
if you want people to save money and be a "thrifty" nation? then it's a good idea cuz it makes people more likely to not be "consumers".
most capitalists want the nation of consumers.
that's why they have sold our country to China. make no mistake about it. China has paid and is paying them very well.
Why wouldn't consumers spend their money just as they do now?
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!! Posts: 3317 | From: CT | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Should I learn Mandarin and Cantonese now or later?
Mandarin, it already is the most spoken language in the world. It's also much easier then Cantonese. Mandarin has 4 tones while Cantonese has about 8 or 9 tones.
Ni hao Cow!
Ni hao ma?
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lockman:Why wouldn't consumers spend their money just as they do now?
good question, Huckabee never addresses this part of his plot to overthrow the economy does he? JK about the overthrow part.
people would spend less to avoid paying taxes and black markets would spring up rather quickly, people would go to Mexico or the Bahams to buy yachts for instance. or just buy from "unregistered" sellers not collecting tax. if they cannot bring their luxury yacht into the States? then we'd see even more people and jobs leaving the country with their money just because they want to avoid paying taxes.
sales tax is regressive, what happens is people buy what they need at the same rates, but luxury items get cut back on.
there was a luxury tax on yachts etc put on under Clinotn that killed the yacht building industry on the NC outerbanks... alotta craftsmens lost their jobs.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I think Huckabee meant a flat tax instead of income. Now this looks more like an income, state sales, and federal sales tax on goods.
We got to pay for this new administration somehow.
Mortgage rates going up soon, government borrowing through the roof, we will see the byproduct of this soon enough.
Actually no, I don't think that mortgage rates are going to increase in any dramaatic way in the near future. I have a few reasons for thinking that.
The latest CPI (Consumer Price Index) report showed inflationary pressures remained unchanged in April after taking a 0.1 decrease in March. We do have a price tag to pay eventually but we are as of yet are still fighting off deflation. Banks are just now starting to repay their government loans. It will be a while before we see how much of the money that has been put out there will need to be reconciled and how much of it was just a shell game.
Also, despite all this talk about the ending of the depression the truth is yields on US treasuries are still high and have being increasing (increasing yields mean decreasing percentage rates) as layoffs, foreclosures, bankruptcies, and delinquencies continue to be the leading headlines triggering an investor "flight to equity" (safe securities). While treasuries and mortgage back securities are two different creatures MBS tend to loosely track the the 10 yr UST. (Very loosely, since the sub-prime meltdown, but the pattern is still there.)
The price for a barrel of oil has been rising but that is because of a combination of a return of investor speculation coinciding with OPEC supply reductions. Consumer consumption is still way down and reserves are at record levels.
Finally and most importantly, one of the few parts of the stimulus package that made sense to me was a pledge by the Federal Reserve to help spur lending by purchasing 1.25 Trillion worth of MBS. In the beginning the Fed bought approximately 250 Billion worth to force 30 yr mortgage rates down to just under 5%. Since then they have been slowly buying just enough to keep rates at or just below 5%. To date the Fed has purchase a total 507 Billion in MBS and still has another 743 Billion worth of dry powder ready to be used. Unless the housing market (and thereby the MBS market) starts becoming more active we have at least another year before that money has been spent and the mortgage market goes back to unfettered supply and demand making the market.
All this IMO.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues. Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i agree just about 100% BF. mortgage rates will be low for quite awhile yet. the housing makret is flooded with forclosures that the banks have got to sell. they can't raise rates till they get inventory way down.
oil is on a fake bull run, there is no supply shortqage and there's lots of oil already pumped waiting to be sold. it's likely to drop hard unless some idiot shorts too much of it and they put a Fed call on them like happened last time at about 120$/brl
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
In which the president discovers an American intelligence agency at Five Guys
On his trip to get a burger with Brian Williams at Five Guys this afternoon, the President appears to have learned of the existence of a Defense Department intelligence arm, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, from an agency employee also at the burger restaurant.
"So explain to me exactly what this National Geospatial..." Obama said, after the worker mentioned his employer, according to a video of the event.
"We work with, uh, satellite imagery," the worker, Walter replied.
A POLITICO reader caught the exchange, which starts around 5:45 on this C-SPAN video.
The transcript:
Obama: What do you do Walter? Walter: I work at, uh, NGA, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency Obama: Outstanding, how long you been doing that? Walter: About six years Obama: Yea? Walter: Yes. Obama: You like it? Walter: I do, keeps me... Obama: So explain to me exactly what this National Geospatial...uh... Walter: Uh, we work with, uh, satellite imagery.. Obama: Right Walter: [unintelligible] ...support systems, so... Obama: Sounds like good work. Walter: Enjoy the weekend. Obama: Appreciate it.
According to the Defense Department:
The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) is a Department of Defense combat support agency and a member of the national Intelligence Community (IC). NGA develops imagery and map-based intelligence solutions for U.S. national defense, homeland security and safety of navigation.
NGA provides timely, relevant and accurate geospatial intelligence in support of national security objectives. The term "geospatial intelligence" means the exploitation and analysis of imagery and geospatial information to describe, assess and visually depict physical features and geographically referenced activities on the Earth. Geospatial intelligence consists of imagery, imagery intelligence and geospatial (e.g., mapping, charting and geodesy) information.
Guess they're not getting much airtime in the President's Daily Brief
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lockman:Why wouldn't consumers spend their money just as they do now?
good question, Huckabee never addresses this part of his plot to overthrow the economy does he? JK about the overthrow part.
people would spend less to avoid paying taxes and black markets would spring up rather quickly, people would go to Mexico or the Bahams to buy yachts for instance. or just buy from "unregistered" sellers not collecting tax. if they cannot bring their luxury yacht into the States? then we'd see even more people and jobs leaving the country with their money just because they want to avoid paying taxes.
sales tax is regressive, what happens is people buy what they need at the same rates, but luxury items get cut back on.
there was a luxury tax on yachts etc put on under Clinotn that killed the yacht building industry on the NC outerbanks... alotta craftsmens lost their jobs.
Under the fair tax you get all of your paycheck. Tax cheats are nothing new and would have to be dealt with more stringently. Because the hidden tax in products are eliminated you would pay no more for products than you do now. The difference is you would know how much tax your paying and the government would have to come clean as to how it's being spent. The US economy would be revitalized because it would be a tax haven for companies due to the tax structure.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!! Posts: 3317 | From: CT | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The difference is you would know how much tax your paying and the government would have to come clean as to how it's being spent.
huh?
how would you know more than you do now?
if there's "hidden taxes" now? it's because of loopholes that were created by business people and pushed to and thru congress by lobbyists.
as for coming clean about how tax money is spent? Bush was the biggest spender of hidden money that ever existed.
he tried to pay for all the wars with special spending budgets to conceal their true costs. the pentagon couldn't even account for most of the money it spent and Rummy and Cheney were blocking anybody who tried to make discovery of it..
face it, we've been robbed blind and left to bankruptcy. (as GM goes, so goes the nation)-we've traded financial security for a war in the mideast, funded by the Chinese, while we allowed all of our middle class jobs to be outsourced.
the "fair tax" would change nothing, and don't tell me we'd have stricter laws either, cuz none of US wants more damn laws.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: The difference is you would know how much tax your paying and the government would have to come clean as to how it's being spent.
huh?
how would you know more than you do now?
if there's "hidden taxes" now? it's because of loopholes that were created by business people and pushed to and thru congress by lobbyists.
as for coming clean about how tax money is spent? Bush was the biggest spender of hidden money that ever existed.
he tried to pay for all the wars with special spending budgets to conceal their true costs. the pentagon couldn't even account for most of the money it spent and Rummy and Cheney were blocking anybody who tried to make discovery of it..
face it, we've been robbed blind and left to bankruptcy. (as GM goes, so goes the nation)-we've traded financial security for a war in the mideast, funded by the Chinese, while we allowed all of our middle class jobs to be outsourced.
the "fair tax" would change nothing, and don't tell me we'd have stricter laws either, cuz none of US wants more damn laws.
Under the FAIR tax it's the only tax. Therefore we should know how much is being collected.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!! Posts: 3317 | From: CT | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Under the FAIR tax it's the only tax. Therefore we should know how much is being collected.
yeah, sure it is. and we don't know now? i'm not clear what you are getting at.. i can show you exaclty how much money we collect right now if you really want... and i know to within 100$ how much taxes i pay every year including sales tax.
i still point back the original argument that professional economists make, it discourages spending, and most true Capitalists do not want it. ask a pro, they'll tell you exaclty what i did.
Huckabee seems to me like very nice man, he'd be a great neighbor, but one musician bozo from Arkansas was already enough
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Under the FAIR tax it's the only tax. Therefore we should know how much is being collected.
yeah, sure it is. and we don't know now? i'm not clear what you are getting at.. i can show you exaclty how much money we collect right now if you really want... and i know to within 100$ how much taxes i pay every year including sales tax.
i still point back the original argument that professional economists make, it discourages spending, and most true Capitalists do not want it. ask a pro, they'll tell you exaclty what i did.
Huckabee seems to me like very nice man, he'd be a great neighbor, but one musician bozo from Arkansas was already enough
So your saying most people would rather just keep the present system? I'm for a simple system of financing the Federal government. I'll pay my fair share and so will everyone else. Our system is broken lets get control back.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!! Posts: 3317 | From: CT | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So your saying most people would rather just keep the present system? I'm for a simple system of financing the Federal government. I'll pay my fair share and so will everyone else. Our system is broken lets get control back.
actually? i AM saying that most lobbyists and the businesses they represent do in fact want the current system, they created it for themselves.
i always have to laugh when people start complaining about how unfair it is to "wealthy" people. the fortune 500 has payed lower and lower taxes since the end of the WW2, somebody has to pay, and poor people don't have any money.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the short the run there would be some money hoarding with a sales tax.......that hoarding menatality is unsustainable.
Long term, people start spending again because of the concept of "keeping up with Jones."
IMO, if there must be a tax.....make it a sales tax. Some industries get hurt.....so it goes.....some industries prosper.
People will always find some way to dodge, but at least nobody is exhorbantly punished for simply being successful......every thing is not solved and the cheats continue to cheat.
-------------------- "The greatest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." (WC) Posts: 386 | From: Georgia | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I don't see anything wrong with making luxuries real luxuries. If you want it, fine...but you are gonna pay through the nose for it. Might make us all a little more realistic about finances if there was a bit more sting when we buy our toys.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues. Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
