From the ArticleThe updated rules also ban dull, long speeches and fawning write-ups in the state newspapers
Maybe someone can explain why this fiscal cliff thing is supposed to be scary?
I mean, it raises taxes to pre-Bush tax cut levels and slashes spending back nearly across the board. This is the purest compromise between the two debating sides and will likely go much further to fixing our budget issues than whatever last minute, rushed compromise they concoct (not that it comes close, or is the right direction).
Yes, I would dislike it. Yes, it will do too much too suddenly for our current economy to handle without some major issues right now, but since nothing that has been looked at or proposed addresses the real issues this will be the only action that screws everyone equally. The rich get higher tax increases than everyone else while the poor get the entitlements they receive cut.
President Obama keeps saying something about fair share, right?
To be honest, I figure we are damned if we do, damned if we don't. The people telling me to freak out are the ones also telling me it is the other guys' fault. Considering what their word is worth, I can't be bothered to feel distressed about it. I think we will notice, but not that much. We are already in the crapper.
Government doesn't make money, it takes it from the economy. $500 billion in spending cuts is just $500 billion not being shuffled around.Simple explaination is that the American economy is partly funded by the huge deficit spending you have now. Take $500,000,000,000 out of the economy in terms of spending cuts and you reduce your economy by $500 Billion.
Simple explaination is that the American economy is partly funded by the huge deficit spending you have now. Take $500,000,000,000 out of the economy in terms of spending cuts and you reduce your economy by $500 Billion. Americans have been living to some degree on large amounts of borrowed money for more than a decade. Taking away that deficit spending means the ecomomy will shrink. You an argue all day long about how to do that, but the fact is you have to pay the piper at some point. Continuing on the same path will lead to ruin.
Government doesn't make money, it takes it from the economy. $500 billion in spending cuts is just $500 billion not being shuffled around.
Now $500 billion being taken and then not redistributed is $500 billion removed from the economy, which will happen to pay the deficit at some point anyway.
That said, they just approved over $500 billion for the military. I'd hazard a guess that if we stopped wars, stopped dropping bombs on numerous countries, quit threatening war with Iran, and now Syria, and reduce our hundreds of oversease bases, we could probably save a chunk of that and hold on to some of the lower tax rates or entitlements. But part of this fiscal cliff deal was military goes untouched.
The ultimate solution won't come from taxes or spending cuts any time soon. The greatest way to increase tax revenue is to have natural income growth, which means a stronger economy that provides more jobs to the point that it has to have competing wages. Unfortunately, not a single proposal on the table works toward doing that.
Its crazy how few Americans understand that and live with the mindset that they are entitled to all these "free" benefits.
Maybe someone can explain why this fiscal cliff thing is supposed to be scary?
A government running a BALANCED BUDGET shuffles money around. A government running a DEFICIT is injecting the value of that DEFICIT into the economy. Take some of the deficit spending away and you have a smaller economy.
It's not. I really want us to go over the cliff. Every time the politicians get scared and start crying doom and gloom, I always think their solutions sound even worse... and this is no different.
They shouldn't have bailed out wall street, they should have let some investment firms fail. They shouldn't have spent gobs of money on stimulus, they should have just let the economy come back naturally, they shouldn't have bailed out mortgages - should have allowed foreclosures. And now they shouldn't compromise on spending.
They keep doing all the wrong things, and I keep wishing they would just sit back and do nothing.
The fiscal cliff is desperately needed to cut spending.
Even deficit money is still taken frothy economy, the future economy, but still the economy. And it ultimately adds no long-term value because it must be paid back.A government running a BALANCED BUDGET shuffles money around. A government running a DEFICIT is injecting the value of that DEFICIT into the economy. Take some of the deficit spending away and you have a smaller economy.
It's more like having business investors or a business loan. They want that money back eventually and your business' value does not nclude that value.Or look at it another way. You have a giant visitor from Japan and he spends $1.5 Trillion per year in your country and now he's going to spend $1 Trillion...
The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.
Do you understand what will happen? You know most economist predict a depression if all of the fiscal cliff's tax increases and spending cuts happen.It's not. I really want us to go over the cliff. Every time the politicians get scared and start crying doom and gloom, I always think their solutions sound even worse... and this is no different.
I agree, but after unemployment in below 7% and falling and growth is at least a sustained 3%.The fiscal cliff is desperately needed to cut spending.
Well, kind of. Inflation decreases debt. So after a few more years of inflation, the debt from the deficits will be much smaller than they are today in terms of percentage.Even deficit money is still taken frothy economy, the future economy, but still the economy. And it ultimately adds no long-term value because it must be paid back.
Government is a business? NoIt's more like having business investors or a business loan. They want that money back eventually and your business' value does not nclude that value.
And now that our deficit is approaching our GDP we are approaching running in the red. In business that is a sign of disaster. In government everyone just thinks fiscal responsibility means not going as much into deficit each year.
The fiscal cliff will just be a bump in the road in comparison to what we are setting ourselves up for.
Well, kind of. Inflation decreases debt. So after a few more years of inflation, the debt from the deficits will be much smaller than they are today in terms of percentage.
Government is a business? No
The deficit is 1/16 of GDP. And there are 0 consequences from running $trillion deficits for a short period of time. Does it need to be fixed? Of course, but not until the economy is running closer to it's potential.
And how does government debt affect you or the economy? How did the US credit downgrade affect anything? Wait, let me guess, the confidence fairy?
Nevermind the fact outstanding federal debt almost mirrors GDP since forever, so I find your worries completely unjustified.
And Greece? Don't they use a currency their government can't control? So the US is not Greece, and the US has experienced minimal inflation from all the 'printing of dollars' going on lately... so the Austrian hyperinflation worries are completely unjustified, also.
http://www.mygovcost.org/2012/01/14/federal-debt-climbs-past-annual-gdp/Incorrect.
Where do you think the money comes from to pay that interest? Taxes. I pay taxes, lots and lots of taxes. For someone who doesn't pay income taxes, gov't debt has no effect whatsoever because they receive things from the government and pay no income tax. The more they get the better off their lives will be. Nowadays in your country and probably ours, that's more than half the population. Their vote is the same as mine, one. They have no reason whatsover to vote for anyone advocating austerity because they save nothing and get less through good sound conservative government policy
Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.
If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties. Prosperity for a large middle class though will become an abstract dream.
This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled. Congress first directed, with bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy. Then it was the Federal Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn’t succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely – that is until it too fails. There’s a cost to all of this and let me assure you delaying the payment is no longer an option. The rules of the market will extract its pound of flesh and it won’t be pretty.
The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism. And the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future. The two feed on themselves, making our situation worse.
If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism, corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored. By only expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.
Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often it’s for one’s own freedom and not for others. Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.
Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited. These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.
http://www.mygovcost.org/2012/01/14/federal-debt-climbs-past-annual-gdp/
Clearly the ratio fluctuates. But the trends remain the same; as GDP goes up, debt goes up. Hence, "almost".
Besides, you paying an amount of money in taxes has 0 to do with the economy as a whole; this is a discussion about macroeconomics, not micro. Now if you think you paying too much taxes is a drag on the economy, that may be an argument, but in the US the GDP has been growing fine and the income inequality has grown dramatically with lower top marginal tax rates. So that argument fails.
That doesn't really make sense I don't think.A government running a BALANCED BUDGET shuffles money around. A government running a DEFICIT is injecting the value of that DEFICIT into the economy. Take some of the deficit spending away and you have a smaller economy.
Or look at it another way. You have a giant visitor from Japan and he spends $1.5 Trillion per year in your country and now he's going to spend $1 Trillion...
If you were to let Dapper continue you'd have that record memorized in no time.BTW, was that dapper? I know I have zero say but I wish the guy was allowed to continue.
KeefThat doesn't really make sense I don't think.
FK already stated the fact that government does not generate wealth. Assuming a government has no ability to print money, that government is forced to operate on money that is takes out of the free market through taxation, fees, fines, etc. There is no new wealth created by that process, simply a transfer of money from the market to the government.
Do you understand what will happen? You know most economist predict a depression if all of the fiscal cliff's tax increases and spending cuts happen.
I agree, but after unemployment in below 7% and falling and growth is at least a sustained 3%.
Well, kind of. Inflation decreases debt. So after a few more years of inflation, the debt from the deficits will be much smaller than they are today in terms of percentage.
And deficit spending does add value to the economy when people are producing output. That coupled with inflation's debt shrinking ability means the government should run deficits while in an economic crisis.
Of course, but not until the economy is running closer to it's potential.
Just look at Europe. How well has austerity done their recovery?
And how does government debt affect you or the economy? How did the US credit downgrade affect anything? Wait, let me guess, the confidence fairy?
That doesn't really make sense I don't think.
FK already stated the fact that government does not generate wealth. Assuming a government has no ability to print money, that government is forced to operate on money that is takes out of the free market through taxation, fees, fines, etc. There is no new wealth created by that process, simply a transfer of money from the market to the government.
But our government does have the ability to print money. Not only does our government take wealth out of the market, but it also prints even more, constantly diluting the value of each unit of money already in existence. That's a net negative effect - the government is actively making everybody poorer.
If the government stopped spending money on things that weren't profitable, namely most of the things it does, especially the military, it could use that saved money to help reduce the deficit - they've already taken it out of the economy so where they spend it doesn't matter. The more they save in one area the more they have to spend in another, and I think that would be a useful strategy for reducing the deficit.
.
He's not talking about printing money, he's talking about borrowing large sums of money from Japan/China and it being spent into the economy.....
Cook said in his interview with NBC that companies like Apple chose to produce their products in places like China, not because of the lower costs associated with it, but because the manufacturing skills required just aren't present in the U.S. anymore.
Assad's government said the warnings about chemical arms were aimed at whipping up an excuse for military intervention. NATO decided this week to send U.S., German and Dutch batteries of air-defense missiles to the Turkish border, meaning hundreds of American and European troops will deploy to Syria's frontier for the first time since the war began.
U.S. officials said the Obama administration was considering blacklisting Jabhat al-Nusra, an influential rebel group accused by other rebels of indiscriminate tactics that has advocated an Islamic state in Syria and is suspected of ties to al Qaeda.
There's probably truth in his quote, but it still comes back to manufacturing cost. All the facilities left to go to the cheaper manufacturing market and so went the skills. The cost of labour must be rising dramatically in the far East if they're prepared to invest in facilities as well as training.Apple To Produce Macs In U.S. Next Year Just thought I'd throw that out there.
Interesting. While it's really just a small thing, surely it is a good thing. I'm beginning to think operating in China is getting more expensive.