Where's Elaine Chow?, when you need her...

Discussion in 'Economics' started by limitdown, Jan 9, 2004.

  1. i can't imagine greenspan would ever suggest increasing taxes, but clearly government spending MUST stop or this country is heading for financial ruin. wasteful government programs need to come to an end - period. for every $1 of government spending and taxes that goes to a worthy purpose, $49 is wasted. my mother worked for the government and could cite billion dollar programs that produced nothing.

    the problem is that there is no check on the government like there is on a corporation (stockholders) to spend and produce efficiently, so the government shouldn't be given the money to do so.

    instead of stockholders that force the company (country) to contain costs, we have people looking for handouts, expecting everyone but themselves to take care of their job, health costs, children, housing, school, etc, etc, etc.
     
    #51     Jan 11, 2004
  2. Greenspan would never suggest RAISING TAXES, but he would certainly imply that TAX CUTS ( a second tax cut ) are not a good idea, like former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill indicated tonight on "60 Mintues" shortly before he was fired.
     
    #52     Jan 11, 2004
  3. expound on these points...
    keep it neutral from political slurs
    keep it (your comments) objective so that we don't offend others who get snagged on political discussions and we never finish meaningful economic discussions.

    your insights seem refreshing.....
     
    #53     Jan 12, 2004
  4. very well said....
     
    #54     Jan 12, 2004
  5. IOW jobless recovery (in other words)....

    that's what you've just described, until you see the homeless person selling snowballs during a snow storm outside your office building as you exit to take the commuter train home to the suburbs and log on to trade stocks, and you suddenly remember that face looked familiar, and indeed, he/she used to work at your company....

    Can a victory really be a victory if all the troops were slaughtered on the field of battle?

    Can/Does the economy matter to those who have lost their seat at the economic table?

    Have you seen the result of whole communities throughout hundreds of counties across the US living in make shift soup towns? There was such a depressing segment on one of the hour long news shows that they had to pull the tapes and not aire those segments again, as planned.

    Realities, not political discussions...
     
    #55     Jan 12, 2004

  6. so many of the engineers, software designers and other highly degreed technical types (that I know of, worked with, heard of and were told about through other contacts) were all brainstorming just how to unionize as a final defensive move against the realities that are now self evident, namely the offshoring of our entire industries.

    you see, the investment in time, college, additional classes and certifications, overtime, pride in workmanship and other significant design / education-investment issues makes these losses more deeply felt than just a line manufacturing job. if it weren't for the direction that we're all lead in, namely education, career specialization and such, then losing these jobs wouldn't be such a hot button all across the country....

    the significant implications in destroying the tax paying middle class are more far reaching, especially since the rich have been given more than 3 tax cuts in the last 3.2 years than in all of history.

    simply put, "whom is left to keep the tax base afloat?"

    there certainly aren't enough day-traders...
     
    #56     Jan 12, 2004
  7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote from ratboy88:

    the problem isn't clinton/rubin vs bush/neocons. the problem is nafta/gatt/wto/imf.............GLOBALIZATION....free trade. greenspan expanded the bubble when he bailed out his buddies at LTCM, thusly, leading to a very temporary ONE year budget surplus. clinton/bush/rubin/greencrap are all complicit in this whole globalization rape of america. as ross perot warned us....that sucking sound you hear are all these jobs being "outsourced" and if you don't think it will effect us all at least derivatively you are suckers.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    lol
     
    #57     Jan 12, 2004
  8. we're so far apart on everything, there is no way to convince you otherwise, and i get the feeling neither yourself nor waggie read anything into my posts, while picking out one or two minor minor things (bush is a protectionist) and expounding on those. you have not acknowledged any of the points i made, nor have you offered one rational argument to refute that protectionism, unions, and high taxes are all horrific for a high standard of living, jobs, etc, etc. while free trade, globalization, etc, benefits everyone. yes, those that choose not to learn a skill that is in demand (computers rather than steel), or better themselves, and those that look for handouts, will not experience the same level of success or standard of living, which is at it should be.

    before we go any further, we must state this basic fact. the US is the strongest economy in the world - period. look at the rest of the world for god's sake before you start painting this horrific picture of the US. you need to first acknowledge the fact that we are an economic superpower, the 'land of opportunity', and the the reasons why.

    you don't seem to realize the above stated basic fact, much less the reasons for it, which is that we still have some form of capitalism here(though it's dying). however, other countries have begun to see the success we've had, and are breaking down their barriers (china), while we are going the oppositie direction and becoming more socialist, due to your barriers of trade and unions. these countries will soon catch us, and your precious jobs will go up in smoke, as higher taxes will squelch the entreprenuerial spirit by taking away the incentive to take risks.

    reread what i said about unions - how they are the reason for the flight of manufacturing jobs, and if you're 'contacts' in technical fields choose to undergoe organized blackmail and create artificially high wages, the same will happen to their jobs.

    i'm going to go out on a limb here and say that your 'contacts' are not attempting to unionize to prevent from losing jobs, but to blackmail their employers into paying them more than they are worth. instead they should be directing their efforts to bettering themselves and developing or enhancing their skill set (if in technical, learning new programming languages, etc)

    your 'pride in work' is a nice theory, but it's just not reality. people work, and take risks (form companies and create services)to make a profit, and if you take away that incentive through higher taxes, form unions to force the owner/founder to give up a piece of his company, force the him to pay ARTIFICIALLLY high wages so that his products are no longer competitive, there will be NO jobs.

    in terms of free trade. i'll say it once again. cheaper products raise the standard of living for EVERYONE. the poor here can afford a computer because of cheaper labor, and god willing, educate themselves and become a productive member of the economy. if say dell produced all their products in the US, paid their employees $50 an hour to assemble a computer, you'd be complaining about how only the rich can afford a computer. furthermore, that company and those jobs would not be around for very long because it would be unable to compete with foreign computer manufacturers. instead, it's manufacturered cheaply overseas, creating a HUGE number of jobs in the technical computer field, database administrators, programmers, etc. etc.
     
    #58     Jan 12, 2004
  9. "The factor Rubin himself sees as most important is his habit of "probabilistic thinking": a willingness to always ask questions like "What else might happen?", "What if we're wrong?", "What could happen next?", and to look at the full range of situations that might come to pass--and at their costs and benefits--rather than to assume that things will go as planned or as the fashionable ideology or favorite administration model would have predicted. For all forecasts turn out to be wrong along at least one important dimension. Pounding the table and talking more loudly does not make unwanted facts disappear. Rubin's recognition that the world is a complicated and poorly-understood place, where lots of unexpected and surprising things happen (as opposed to a place to which John Maynard Keynes or Milton Friedman or Irving Kristol has already drawn us an accurate map we need merely to consult), seems to have been the most powerful of his secret weapons."

    http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002828.html
     
    #59     Jan 12, 2004
  10. CalTrader

    CalTrader Guest

    The key problem: US companies have shifted nearly all training burdens to the individual - as has government which has greatly reduced the availability of even cheap public college education.

    The primary question every individual needs to ask:
    If I am paying for all my training and take all the risk, why would I go to work for a company that merely wants to exploit me and offers absolutely no opportunity for job security ?

    This is the problem that needs to be addressed: Individuals cannot continue to shoulder these types of debts merely to get into jobs that may not last long enough to pay a significant portion of their school debt.

    As time goes on fewer and fewer individuals will be willing to take these types of financial risks and US companies will have a more difficult time finding quality US citizens willing to work as employees rather than part owners - no matter what the tax reforms regarding ownership stakes are .......
     
    #60     Jan 12, 2004