BoltProspects Community Forums

BoltProspects Community Forums (http://boltprospects.com/forum/index.php)
-   The Room (http://boltprospects.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   News of the Day II (http://boltprospects.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10386)

BurnTHalO 05-05-2014 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaseSpace (Post 168132)
If a balanced budget amendment was passed the defense budget would be obliterated before any other programs were touched. There's nothing else to cut from them.

I think that is the true humor of it all. The programs with excess funding are all Republican-backed programs. Unless the goal is to eliminate all regulations, standards, progress, and science (and enter China water/air territory without the work to get out of it), you have to look at programs which use the most money (military, medicare, SS, etc.).

uf1910 05-05-2014 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BurnTHalO (Post 168174)
I think that is the true humor of it all. The programs with excess funding are all Republican-backed programs. Unless the goal is to eliminate all regulations, standards, progress, and science (and enter China water/air territory without the work to get out of it), you have to look at programs which use the most money (military, medicare, SS, etc.).

Social security SHOULD be a self-funded program. The fact it is not and is now considered an albatross on the gov't budget is a failure by BOTH parties who robbed from the coffers to fund inflated gov't programs in the past. Absolutely ridiculous that any gov't run by any party can be operated in this manner. Rob the future to pay for the present, and even in spite of this we still can't even pay for all of the present bills as it is.

Just typing this pissed me off and is one reason I don't debate politics. I hate all politicians honestly. In reality all they represent is who gave them the most campaign money for re-election.

End rant and my apologies for the rant but I just couldn't help myself. Damn Mondays

Bolthed 05-05-2014 02:18 PM

This is the No. 1 thing I hear from the sheep who spout mindless talking points: "We've got too much debt. It's gonna kill this country/economy."

They have no idea what they're talking about. Every economist who isn't paid for by the right wing has said that our recent debt reduction efforts have more than addressed the issue and put us back on a very sustainable track. There's always been debt, but now it's some kind of rallying cry of the stupid.

BurnTHalO 05-05-2014 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bolthed (Post 168185)
This is the No. 1 thing I hear from the sheep who spout mindless talking points: "We've got too much debt. It's gonna kill this country/economy."

They have no idea what they're talking about. Every economist who isn't paid for by the right wing has said that our recent debt reduction efforts have more than addressed the issue and put us back on a very sustainable track. There's always been debt, but now it's some kind of rallying cry of the stupid.

There are people on this board that no much more than me and can probably verify exactly how this is the case, but I seem to remember hearing that not only have we always had debt, we actually need to have debt, that eliminating all debt is a very bad thing (or something to that effect. Like I said, someone please fill in the blanks on this one).

WaiverWire 05-05-2014 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bolthed (Post 168185)
This is the No. 1 thing I hear from the sheep who spout mindless talking points: "We've got too much debt. It's gonna kill this country/economy."

They have no idea what they're talking about. Every economist who isn't paid for by the right wing has said that our recent debt reduction efforts have more than addressed the issue and put us back on a very sustainable track. There's always been debt, but now it's some kind of rallying cry of the stupid.

No doubt you are correct about the right. But the same can be said for the left.

What is needed is economists that have nothing to gain nor lose.

Hoek 05-05-2014 03:52 PM

There's debt and then there's so much fucking debt that interest payments alone will dwarf other government spending. Paying it all the way down is a bit naive yes, but we're at the point where we're going to start paying more to maintain the bat shit retarded debt than on the things we actually need the government to do. That is kind of a problem, even if you loves you some more government spending.

Flycoon 05-05-2014 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoek (Post 168189)
There's debt and then there's so much fucking debt that interest payments alone will dwarf other government spending. Paying it all the way down is a bit naive yes, but we're at the point where we're going to start paying more to maintain the bat shit retarded debt than on the things we actually need the government to do. That is kind of a problem, even if you loves you some more government spending.

I'm all for chopping Defense by 2/3, removing the cap on SS taxes, and instituting a tax on financial transactions that are executed by buy/sell bots. Raise the minimum wage so nobody working full time qualifies for food stamps or other government assistance. Eliminate the child tax credit and earned income credit. Personal exemptions will only be for the working heads of the household; why should you pay less taxes for having more dependents using services furnished by the government?

Many things that can be done without raising tax rates that will increase revenue. But that seems to be a no-no as well.

WaiverWire 05-05-2014 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flycoon (Post 168190)
I'm all for chopping Defense by 2/3, removing the cap on SS taxes, and instituting a tax on financial transactions that are executed by buy/sell bots. Raise the minimum wage so nobody working full time qualifies for food stamps or other government assistance. Eliminate the child tax credit and earned income credit. Personal exemptions will only be for the working heads of the household; why should you pay less taxes for having more dependents using services furnished by the government?

Many things that can be done without raising tax rates that will increase revenue. But that seems to be a no-no as well.

Flycoon.......it is nice to see you put your thoughts out on this subject. Some I agree with and others I don't.

I also feel that the cap should be off on SS. I also have no problem with the tax on transactions.

One question. What would you raise the minimum wage to? I say start at $10 and then increase with set increments over a set period of time.

dannybolt 05-05-2014 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flycoon (Post 168190)
I'm all for chopping Defense by 2/3, removing the cap on SS taxes, and instituting a tax on financial transactions that are executed by buy/sell bots.

Agreed on all this. Maybe not 2/3 of the defense budget, but it is long overdue for a healthy haircut.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flycoon (Post 168190)
Eliminate the child tax credit and earned income credit. Personal exemptions will only be for the working heads of the household; why should you pay less taxes for having more dependents using services furnished by the government?

After doing VITA (Volunteer Income Tax Assistance) this tax season, I'm not sure I'm on board with this. I saw far too many people doing their best with next to no resources where a $100 or $200 EIC was huge for them. I'm generally not for kicking the downtrodden while they are down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flycoon (Post 168190)
Raise the minimum wage so nobody working full time qualifies for food stamps or other government assistance.

On the other hand, I disagree with this.

The reason why minimum wage is even an issue is because we have more low skilled workers than we need. By a lot. That is keeping wages depressed. Raising the minimum wage doesn't solve that problem, it merely slaps a band-aid on it. One that will likely begin to peel away quicker than we think.

In 2004, when the economy was screaming along (albeit through unsustainable means), the unemployment rate in the TB area was sub-4% I believe. McDonald's was starting people at $10 an hour. Because they had to pay that to get people in the door. Nobody gave a shit about the minimum wage in 2004. Now it's a hot button issue because real unemployment has been above 10% for more than half a decade, and really is showing no signs of coming down.

While large fast-food corps can certainly absorb the costs of raising the minimum wage, my guess is there are a lot of small business owners who are really gonna get squeezed if the minimum wage is raised by a significant amount. I would think it would also raise the cost of food quite a bit, which is already outpacing inflation before cost of labor increases.

Another aspect of raising the minimum wage across the country is that it increases the wages of the jobs directly above minimum wage. Jobs that are also low-skilled, but may not be direct service oriented, meaning working in customer service or a call center vs. retail or restaurant work. As those job costs increase for the employer, it increases their incentive to offshore or outsource that work. That increases the possibility of increasing the low and middle-skilled unemployed pool, which exacerbates the problem.

I think it's great that Seattle is trying to raise theirs to $15, so we can actually see what will happen instead of everyone working off of hypotheticals or examples from a decade or two or three ago. Maybe I'm wrong, and raising it will solve all kinds of problems. My hunch is that a lot of small businesses will move out of the city, and the price of restaurants and other low skilled services will go up, thereby raising everyone's standard of living; but I love that it is being tried at the local level first, which is as it should be. Laboratories of democracy, etc.

I think the real question is how do you solve the problem of an overabundance of unskilled labor in a country as big as ours? In Europe and Asia, there has been a lot of central planning that has gone into increasing education levels and building economically useful skill sets within their populations. We don't do that. In fact, central planning is an anathema to a large portion of our populace.

BurnTHalO 05-06-2014 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannybolt (Post 168210)
The reason why minimum wage is even an issue is because we have more low skilled workers than we need. By a lot. That is keeping wages depressed. Raising the minimum wage doesn't solve that problem, it merely slaps a band-aid on it. One that will likely begin to peel away quicker than we think.

In 2004, when the economy was screaming along (albeit through unsustainable means), the unemployment rate in the TB area was sub-4% I believe. McDonald's was starting people at $10 an hour. Because they had to pay that to get people in the door. Nobody gave a shit about the minimum wage in 2004. Now it's a hot button issue because real unemployment has been above 10% for more than half a decade, and really is showing no signs of coming down.

While large fast-food corps can certainly absorb the costs of raising the minimum wage, my guess is there are a lot of small business owners who are really gonna get squeezed if the minimum wage is raised by a significant amount. I would think it would also raise the cost of food quite a bit, which is already outpacing inflation before cost of labor increases.

Another aspect of raising the minimum wage across the country is that it increases the wages of the jobs directly above minimum wage. Jobs that are also low-skilled, but may not be direct service oriented, meaning working in customer service or a call center vs. retail or restaurant work. As those job costs increase for the employer, it increases their incentive to offshore or outsource that work. That increases the possibility of increasing the low and middle-skilled unemployed pool, which exacerbates the problem.

I think it's great that Seattle is trying to raise theirs to $15, so we can actually see what will happen instead of everyone working off of hypotheticals or examples from a decade or two or three ago. Maybe I'm wrong, and raising it will solve all kinds of problems. My hunch is that a lot of small businesses will move out of the city, and the price of restaurants and other low skilled services will go up, thereby raising everyone's standard of living; but I love that it is being tried at the local level first, which is as it should be. Laboratories of democracy, etc.

I think the real question is how do you solve the problem of an overabundance of unskilled labor in a country as big as ours? In Europe and Asia, there has been a lot of central planning that has gone into increasing education levels and building economically useful skill sets within their populations. We don't do that. In fact, central planning is an anathema to a large portion of our populace.

Couldn't you go look at what it has done in Australia from 2 years ago? I don't disagree that education is a major issue that needs overhaul, but that is not everything. You bring up Europe, but every European country outside of the Czech Republic has a higher minimum wage/median wage ratio than the US, so I do think there is something to having the minimum wage discussion. Personally, I'm with WW on this in that you probably start in the $10/hour range and go from there. And I'll even include what he said before, and suggest that top economists should be brought together to discuss, debate, and come up with the correct starting point.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2008, BoltProspects.com. All Rights Reserved.