Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 9, 2012, 07:51 PM   #51
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
I cannot believe you still think you can tax your way to prosperity.
Likewise, the Congressional Research Service's study recently proved you can't cut your way to prosperity.

Looks like we'll have to find a rational middle ground.

Scary.
citizenzen is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 08:09 PM   #52
Anuba
macrumors 68040
 
Anuba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
Th Federal government CANNOT stimulate the economy by spending tax dollars on infrastructure projects.
There's no universal approach, no one ideology has the perfect solution that always works. You have to be pragmatic and work out a solution appropriate for the context and the times.

In 1929, the Great Depression hit. The first country to recover from it completely was Sweden, in 1934. It got there Keynes style, spending its way out of the mess. At the time, the US was still struggling with unemployment in the 20% ballpark. It wasn't until WW2 when the crazy deficit spending started that the US recovered and eventually emerged the world's first economic superpower.

For that particular time, Sweden's hybrid of socialism/capitalism happened to be the most effective solution for fast recovery, while free market capitalism alone proved a slow way.

In 2008, the biggest crisis since the GD hit. The US poured astronomical amounts of stimulus money straight into businesses and finance. So did many European countries, and they're all struggling still.
Sweden went completely the other way. It didn't didn't hand out a nickel to banks or corporations, it put together a small stimulus package that went straight to the tax payers -- unemployment benefits, infrastructure investments, education. But big spending was a no-no. And just like in the 1930's, Sweden's recovery was super fast, Sweden stood strong and virtually unscathed in a cesspool of epic fails, paying off national debt while others amassed it, and the momentum is still there: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mattkibb...actually-work/

Spending moderate amounts of tax dollars in this economy is fine, if you spend it wisely and if the money goes to the tax payers, but corporate welfare was an asinine idea.
Anuba is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 08:16 PM   #53
samiwas
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
My company will be moving another 150 jobs overseas this year due to confiscatory tax policies.
Are they more confiscatory than they were in the 90's? In the 80s? In the 70s? In the 60s? In the 50s? When were they less confiscatory?
__________________
A lack of planning on your part should not constitute an emergency on mine.
samiwas is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 08:37 PM   #54
NT1440
macrumors G3
 
NT1440's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hartford, CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by balamw View Post
FWIW I heard the same NPR story this morning and I believe they are referring to this CBO report: http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/c...Tightening.pdf though I have not read it fully yet.

B
Nope, you've got a slightly different story. I'm talking about the CRS report that states that lower taxes on the top end does not have any impact on growth or job creation.
NT1440 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:09 PM   #55
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
The class envy and total lack of understanding of how the economy actually works by the people on this forum would be funny if it were not also the same misunderstanding that the rest of America seems to have.

Th Federal government CANNOT stimulate the economy by spending tax dollars on infrastructure projects.

Wake up people.

Economic growth occurs only when you create something, sell it at a profit, then reinvest that profit to grow your business.

Everything else is simply overhead.

I cannot believe you still think you can tax your way to prosperity.

My company will be moving another 150 jobs overseas this year due to confiscatory tax policies. We cannot afford to bring foreign profits back to the US where the government will now take 50%, therefor we will expand our foreign offices and invest overseas profits there instead.

You can thank the current administration for those job losses.

It's a global economy. Businesses have choices. If you make it hard to do business, we will go where it's not so hard. It's that simple.
It's amazing people still believe this Keynesianism crap. Even if it worked in theory, it never works in practice. We never pay down the debt in good times like Keynes suggested. All we're left with is more debt. If it worked in Sweden, it's only because they paid off the investment after the economy recovered. We haven't done that for 50 years.

This country progressed for over a hundred years with federal spending a fraction (of GDP) of what it is today.
Dmunjal is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:14 PM   #56
balamw
Moderator
 
balamw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by NT1440 View Post
Nope, you've got a slightly different story. I'm talking about the CRS report that states that lower taxes on the top end does not have any impact on growth or job creation.
Yes, but that is the story Rodimus Prime was referring to. Similar conclusion.

B
__________________
MBA (13" 1.7 GHz 128GB), UMBP (15" SD 2.8 GHz), UMB (13" 2.4 GHz), iMac (17" Yonah), 32GB iPad 3 WiFi+LTE, 64 GB iPad WiFi, 32 GB iPhone 5, Airport Extreme
balamw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:39 PM   #57
NT1440
macrumors G3
 
NT1440's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hartford, CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
It's amazing people still believe this Keynesianism crap. Even if it worked in theory, it never works in practice. We never pay down the debt in good times like Keynes suggested. All we're left with is more debt. If it worked in Sweden, it's only because they paid off the investment after the economy recovered. We haven't done that for 50 years.

This country progressed for over a hundred years with federal spending a fraction (of GDP) of what it is today.
So you see how simple that is right? Its not the theory that doesn't work, its the fact that we keep voting in ********s that don't pay down the debt in good times.

It's like the social security fund, everything would be fine if we hadn't repeatedly robbed the fund instead of using it for what it was meant.
NT1440 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:39 PM   #58
Anuba
macrumors 68040
 
Anuba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
It's amazing people still believe this Keynesianism crap. Even if it worked in theory, it never works in practice. We never pay down the debt in good times like Keynes suggested. All we're left with is more debt. If it worked in Sweden, it's only because they paid off the investment after the economy recovered. We haven't done that for 50 years.
There are several reasons why it worked in Sweden at that particular time. It's a small country almost exactly the size of California, with Alaska climate at the top and New York climate at the bottom, an abundance of natural resources for industries and plenty of space for agriculture, meaning it was pretty self-sufficient. It had a 50/50 hybrid economy with government monopoly on many things but with an equally large private sector, working in friendly symbiosis. Shifting the weight from one leg to the other during tough times was easy, provided that the tough times didn't last too long. It's not a long-term solution -- a large public sector can't finance itself like some perpetuum mobile, that's like trying to lift yourself by the hair. When you're bald.
The US economy was never structured like Sweden's, there is no large public sector in place, plus Americans have this peculiar fear and suspicion of government as if it's not made up of people but some alien invasion force in a big mothership looming ominously in the sky, so nothing productive would ever come out of that collaboration. And on top of that, we have the global economy and the Keynesian approach is better suited for a system that's more closed and controlled.
Anuba is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:52 PM   #59
Macky-Mac
macrumors 68020
 
Macky-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
....My company will be moving another 150 jobs overseas this year due to confiscatory tax policies. We cannot afford to bring foreign profits back to the US where the government will now take 50%, therefor we will expand our foreign offices and invest overseas profits there instead.....
when it comes to taxes, your company is moving jobs overseas so it can game the US tax code giving the owners of the company nearly tax free income.

It's time for the US tax code to be re-written to eliminate these shell games
Macky-Mac is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 10:01 PM   #60
LethalWolfe
macrumors Demi-God
 
LethalWolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas View Post
Are they more confiscatory than they were in the 90's? In the 80s? In the 70s? In the 60s? In the 50s? When were they less confiscatory?
Don't you know that corporate America is barely scraping by due to record high profits and record low taxes? Lord, merely hinting at going back to even Reagan-era taxes makes some people scream that that would tax them into oblivion...

Speaking in generalities corporate America and the very wealthy have never, ever had it better than they do now so of course they don't want their spectacular joy ride to end.
__________________
Looking For Lenny - documentary about comedian Lenny Bruce's timeless impact on stand-up comedy & Free Speech.
Netflix, iTunes, Amazon
LethalWolfe is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 10:22 PM   #61
Macky-Mac
macrumors 68020
 
Macky-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewitt View Post
....My company will be moving another 150 jobs overseas this year due to confiscatory tax policies.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by LethalWolfe View Post
Don't you know that corporate America is barely scraping by due to record high profits and record low taxes? Lord, merely hinting at going back to even Reagan-era taxes makes some people scream that that would tax them into oblivion...

Speaking in generalities corporate America and the very wealthy have never, ever had it better than they do now so of course they don't want their spectacular joy ride to end.
hmmmmmmm.....so much for "confiscatory tax policies"
Macky-Mac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 10:57 PM   #62
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by NT1440 View Post
So you see how simple that is right? Its not the theory that doesn't work, its the fact that we keep voting in ********s that don't pay down the debt in good times.

It's like the social security fund, everything would be fine if we hadn't repeatedly robbed the fund instead of using it for what it was meant.
What else do you expect politicians to do? Even if we voted in saints, they quickly become corrupted by the system. This is why the founding fathers were careful to use only gold and silver as the basis for our currency. This ties the hands of politicians so they cannot abuse monetary policy.
Dmunjal is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 06:09 AM   #63
leenak
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LethalWolfe View Post
Don't you know that corporate America is barely scraping by due to record high profits and record low taxes? Lord, merely hinting at going back to even Reagan-era taxes makes some people scream that that would tax them into oblivion...

Speaking in generalities corporate America and the very wealthy have never, ever had it better than they do now so of course they don't want their spectacular joy ride to end.
Yeah, I mentioned my company has been laying off every year for the past 3 or 4 years. I believe they also had a record profit last year. Profits are in the billions but they want to keep that going.
leenak is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:12 AM   #64
Mord
macrumors G4
 
Mord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Old York
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
It's amazing people still believe this Keynesianism crap. Even if it worked in theory, it never works in practice. We never pay down the debt in good times like Keynes suggested. All we're left with is more debt. If it worked in Sweden, it's only because they paid off the investment after the economy recovered. We haven't done that for 50 years.

This country progressed for over a hundred years with federal spending a fraction (of GDP) of what it is today.
It's really quite funny how you say it doesn't work, then cite an example where it totally worked, a country that is fiscally thriving.

It's especially ridiculous given how it was bush spent so much while the going was still good.

Mord is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:52 AM   #65
samiwas
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
This country progressed for over a hundred years with federal spending a fraction (of GDP) of what it is today.
The country also progressed heavily for quite some time (five decades or so) with tax rates much, much higher than they are now. I wonder how, with all that confiscating going on.
__________________
A lack of planning on your part should not constitute an emergency on mine.
samiwas is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:27 AM   #66
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
This country progressed for over a hundred years with federal spending a fraction (of GDP) of what it is today.
Where do you come up with that?

Below is a graph from Business Insider showing federal spending as a percentage of GDP from 1890 to 2010.

How does this graph support your contention? It simply doesn't.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	federalSpendingAsPercentageofGDP.png
Views:	12
Size:	12.9 KB
ID:	376322  
citizenzen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:50 AM   #67
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas View Post
The country also progressed heavily for quite some time (five decades or so) with tax rates much, much higher than they are now. I wonder how, with all that confiscating going on.
Something that's frequently ignored when looking at post election reactions and things is that these are short term reactions. However you set tax rates and spending, businesses and individuals settle on that and budget accordingly. If corporate tax rates started at 0 and went to 10%, it would alter short term behavior due to prior expectations. It's not the absolute rate that but a change in terms. If defense layoffs happen, it's most likely because these companies took on a lot of weight due to inflated spending levels.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:02 AM   #68
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Where do you come up with that?

Below is a graph from Business Insider showing federal spending as a percentage of GDP from 1890 to 2010.

How does this graph support your contention? It simply doesn't.
You're missing a hundred years. Prior to 1913 and the creation of the Fed and the income tax (that big spike in your chart), federal spending was flat for over a hundred years and miniscule (except during the Civil War) . During this time we had the industrial revolution and many world changing inventions without any income taxes or government stimulus. Amazing isn't it?

I'm not taking away the work of the government agencies in the development of the Internet, GPS, space exploration, etc. But it certainly isn't needed. Private industry can do a lot on their own.

The problem is the federal government is spending very little on innovation. Most of the expenses go to supporting the welfare (corporate and personal) and warfare state.
Dmunjal is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:06 AM   #69
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
 
nuckinfutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Middle Earth
Don't care either way.

I'm not starving so higher taxes don't scare me. I work in IT so I'm not worried about layoffs (the skilled always have options)

Folks nothing really has changed since the pleistocene. Humans have always had to hunt, gather and forage. Today you're just hunting for jobs, gathering assets and foraging for opportunities.
nuckinfutz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:08 AM   #70
balamw
Moderator
 
balamw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
Prior to 1913 and the creation of the Fed and the income tax (that big spike in your chart)
The first spike in the chart occurs much later than 1913, and is more likely correlated with WWI.

B
__________________
MBA (13" 1.7 GHz 128GB), UMBP (15" SD 2.8 GHz), UMB (13" 2.4 GHz), iMac (17" Yonah), 32GB iPad 3 WiFi+LTE, 64 GB iPad WiFi, 32 GB iPhone 5, Airport Extreme
balamw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:19 AM   #71
swiftaw
macrumors 603
 
swiftaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Omaha, NE, USA
Total Number of Jobs since the dawn of time that have been added by employers because they wanted to: Zero

The idea that if employers had more money they would hire more employees is ridiculous. The number of employees needed by employers is, and always will be, determined by the minimum number needed to meet the demand.

Thus, they ONLY way to increase the number of jobs is to increase the demand.
swiftaw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:20 AM   #72
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by balamw View Post
The first spike in the chart occurs much later than 1913, and is more likely correlated with WWI.
I definitely think that was the reason for the spike.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
You're missing a hundred years. Prior to 1913 ...
Seriously, you're trying to compare a pre-industrial and far more agrarian society to what we live in today?

That simply doesn't make sense to me.

Find a modern society that outperforms the U.S. in spending/GDP and point to that as an example to follow.

But don't expect anybody to take seriously a comparison to a bygone era over a hundred years ago.
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:46 AM   #73
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
I think some on the right believe in the tax-cut fairy - namely the idea that cutting taxes will always increase economic growth. What's the point of low taxes if the majority of people have become so impoverished that they cannot sustain consumer demand? Taxes don't mean diddly if nobody's buying. Both the US and the UK made mistake in bailing out the banks - they should have instead bailed out middle- and working-class people who would have been affected by the bankrupt banks. Instead, the foolish a$$hats who got us into this mess were bailed out, and they've all retired to a life of luxury while the rest of us are picking up the pieces of their malfeasance, greed, and crimes.

In any case, I wonder if we are watching the last gasp of the right, for both in the US and the UK they are perceived as mean-spirited, selfish, prejudiced, short-minded people who are ill-equipped to cope with the inevitable changes in the world. All of their talk about 'traditional values' simply amounts to having no answers for the future.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:53 AM   #74
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
You
Quote:
Originally Posted by swiftaw View Post
Total Number of Jobs since the dawn of time that have been added by employers because they wanted to: Zero

The idea that if employers had more money they would hire more employees is ridiculous. The number of employees needed by employers is, and always will be, determined by the minimum number needed to meet the demand.

Thus, they ONLY way to increase the number of jobs is to increase the demand.
Then how did Ford, Jobs, etc create new products (and millions of jobs) that were never in demand in the first place? There was zero demand for cars and iPhones until an entrepreneur came along and invested in it and took the risk to create something new.

We're arguing chicken and egg.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
I definitely think that was the reason for the spike.



Seriously, you're trying to compare a pre-industrial and far more agrarian society to what we live in today?

That simply doesn't make sense to me.

Find a modern society that outperforms the U.S. in spending/GDP and point to that as an example to follow.

But don't expect anybody to take seriously a comparison to a bygone era over a hundred years ago.
The late 1800s was marked by the industrial revolution (bringing millions out of poverty) not just an agrarian economy. The point I'm making is not to compare ancient history but that big innovation can happen without taxes and government.
Dmunjal is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 11:57 AM   #75
balamw
Moderator
 
balamw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
Then how did Ford, Jobs, etc create new products (and millions of jobs) that were never in demand in the first place? There was zero demand for cars and iPhones until an entrepreneur came along and invested in it and took the risk to create something new.
Seriously confused by your examples there.

Ford was founded on making cars more efficiently. There was a demand for horseless carriages, but they were not mass produced. Ford and the Model T was an innovation in production techniques to meet demand.

The iPhone was not the first smartphone. I had a Nokia S60 phone for years before I got my iPhone 3GS.

Both of these examples are of evolutionary steps in markets that already existed. Demand was already there, they just found ways to change the production paradigm and/or the feature set.

B
__________________
MBA (13" 1.7 GHz 128GB), UMBP (15" SD 2.8 GHz), UMB (13" 2.4 GHz), iMac (17" Yonah), 32GB iPad 3 WiFi+LTE, 64 GB iPad WiFi, 32 GB iPhone 5, Airport Extreme
balamw is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CNBC survey shows millionaires want higher taxes to fix inequality Michael Goff Politics, Religion, Social Issues 74 May 19, 2014 08:23 AM
Higher DPI Means Higher Resolution (Really?) leerkeller Digital Photography 4 Jun 13, 2013 08:37 AM
No Alternative Minimum Tax patch could mean higher taxes for most ugahairydawgs Politics, Religion, Social Issues 37 Dec 29, 2012 09:28 AM
Apple Retail Stores Seeing Significant Layoffs of Recent Hires? MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 410 Aug 26, 2012 03:15 PM
What's the highest up-voted post that you have seen? macbook pro i5 Wasteland 18 Jun 24, 2012 12:03 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC