What do you think needs to be done to turn the economy around?

[scooterbug44]

Buying local products and shopping at local businesses is a conscious choice that I make for a wide variety of reasons - not all of which are idealistic or unquantifiable.

You are only using the final sale price of an item as a basis for comparison. I am also using overall quality, customer service, the effect of its sale and production on my community, and its effect on my planet as a basis for comparison.

I know how I want the world to be/work and I am putting my money where my mouth is by choosing the $60 toaster, the meal at the non-chain restaurant, the Seaside Rep show instead of Netflix, items at the local hardware or grocery instead of the big box store etc.

I get better service and better products and in the end MY dollar actually goes further by keeping it close to home.

 

[ckhagen]

4. Never going to happen. Unless we have a political revolution.

Well, sign me up for the revolution.

It's starting to become obvious, especially in this thread, that we all agree on a few very important things. These major issues cross party platforms more than we think and the number of eyes opened to our financial situation in this country grows by leaps and bounds every day on all sides of the aisles. Could we maybe set aside our differences on social matters to pursue financial overhaul of this country? I would love to be able to tell my children one day that I was there the day that Americans stopped fighting each other and started fighting the system... and changed their futures for the better.

 

[Kayak Fish]

1. Abolish the corporate income tax. US corporations are the second heaviest taxed in the world. This puts us at a disadvantage in selling our good abroad. The idea of a corporate income tax is silly anyway. Consumers pay the tax in the form of inflated prices.

2. Lower individual tax rates to the levels established by Reagan, 15% and 28%. This would free enourmous amounts of capital which would have a rippling economic effect.

3. Reduce government spending. The current federal tax "revenue" is $4.053 trillion yet we are spending $4.904 trillion which means a current budget deficit of almost $900 billion. The deficit in 2009 could easily be $1 trillion. The amount our federal government spends equates to $46,705 per household. The federal debt will be over $10 trillion by year end. This is unsubstainable. We can never have a balanced budget by raising the Government's revenue. Congress has proven that it has an insatiable spending appetite. We have to cut spending.

4. Get rid of the SEC and the Fed for starters.

5. I hate to say it but let's have a renewal of buy American goods and services. We keep sending our money to Europe and Asia and wonder why the dollar has fallen.

I basically agree with this. Here is my naive idea for helping the middle class:

I think we should go back to tarrifs on foreign goods but cut the corporate tax domestically to zero. Goods produced here would have no embedded tax but foreign goods would be taxed.

It's protectionist and possibly against my principles, but it's the best I can come up with. The less abundant crappy lamps at low prices would probably be offset by a desire for companies to move operations into the U.S. to do business with uber-consumer Americans tax-free, providing more jobs here.

If a Chinese company wants to set up a lamp shop in Freeport, we say OK and then they hire people from Freeport to make lamps. We then get to buy slightly more expensive crappy lamps, but we feel good about it because we see Billy Bob's new truck that he bought that was produced at the Toyota plant in Milton because the lamp factory can afford to pay him a decent wage since they aren't shipping the government 33%.

Probably a horrible plan with huge holes in it but I am no economist and it's the best I can come up with.

 

[Neu!Turismo]

I basically agree with this. Here is my naive idea for helping the middle class:

I think we should go back to tarrifs on foreign goods but cut the corporate tax domestically to zero. Goods produced here would have no embedded tax but foreign goods would be taxed.

It's protectionist and possibly against my principles, but it's the best I can come up with. The less abundant crappy lamps at low prices would probably be offset by a desire for companies to move operations into the U.S. to do business with uber-consumer Americans tax-free, providing more jobs here.

If a Chinese company wants to set up a lamp shop in Freeport, we say OK and then they hire people from Freeport to make lamps. We then get to buy slightly more expensive crappy lamps, but we feel good about it because we see Billy Bob's new truck that he bought that was produced at the Toyota plant in Milton because the lamp factory can afford to pay him a decent wage since they aren't shipping the government 33%.

Probably a horrible plan with huge holes in it but I am no economist and it's the best I can come up with.

You know, that scenario isn't that far-fetched, minus the cutting corporate tax to zero part.
It probably will not be Chinese though. Maybe Japanese, British or European.

 

[Miss Critter]

I admire scooterbug's ideals, but the bottom line is that an increasing number of families don't have the luxury of choosing the $60 toaster. The current system is stacked against domestic production.

 

[elgordoboy]

Buying local products and shopping at local businesses is a conscious choice that I make for a wide variety of reasons - not all of which are idealistic or unquantifiable.

You are only using the final sale price of an item as a basis for comparison. I am also using overall quality, customer service, the effect of its sale and production on my community, and its effect on my planet as a basis for comparison.

I know how I want the world to be/work and I am putting my money where my mouth is by choosing the $60 toaster, the meal at the non-chain restaurant, the Seaside Rep show instead of Netflix, items at the local hardware or grocery instead of the big box store etc.

I get better service and better products and in the end MY dollar actually goes further by keeping it close to home.

I do not disagree with you on keepingthings local, most especially when a superior value/product is offered. I will not willingly eat in a chain restaurant, there is no comparison to be made between the Seaside Rep and Netflix, and unless those nails at the local hardware store are made in a smithy in the back then they are sending the money out of the area to the manufacturer anyway. A place like For The Health that sources much of its product locally is great. I will even subsidize a place such as that by buying items that I might find elsewhere cheaper simply to keep them in business and maintain my access to some of the freshest goods. Though in actuality I have seen many staple items there cheaper than what I can order them in for, which is unusual and good. A real life example of what I mean when I use the "toaster": There is a local store where I can purchase 1.6oz. of truffle oil (on the rare times it is available, which is another issue) for $18.00 or I can order 8oz. of a superior flavored truffle oil for $28.00. The community would be better served by me sending my $28.00 out of our "system" and then paying the local purveyor another $18.00 to go plant a lemon tree or do anything productive. I have personally saved $44.00, I have a superior product, the local vendor has fresh lemons to sell, and the community has access to more fresh lemons. Or I could go buy a bottle of the truffle oil sold (though not produced) locally then throw it in the trash and go get the one I prefer. I would be out the same money, the local shopkeeper is worse off because I took a product off the shelf that has to be replaced and he doesn't have a lemon tree, and the community has less supply of fresh local lemons. If anyone wants to start producing truffle oil here, for sale locally and abroad I will gladly participate and be a customer.

 

[30ashopper]

I basically agree with this. Here is my naive idea for helping the middle class:

I think we should go back to tarrifs on foreign goods but cut the corporate tax domestically to zero. Goods produced here would have no embedded tax but foreign goods would be taxed.

It's protectionist and possibly against my principles, but it's the best I can come up with. The less abundant crappy lamps at low prices would probably be offset by a desire for companies to move operations into the U.S. to do business with uber-consumer Americans tax-free, providing more jobs here.

If a Chinese company wants to set up a lamp shop in Freeport, we say OK and then they hire people from Freeport to make lamps. We then get to buy slightly more expensive crappy lamps, but we feel good about it because we see Billy Bob's new truck that he bought that was produced at the Toyota plant in Milton because the lamp factory can afford to pay him a decent wage since they aren't shipping the government 33%.

Probably a horrible plan with huge holes in it but I am no economist and it's the best I can come up with.

There's just one problem with that, crank up tarrifs on incoming goods, and our trade partners crank up tarrifs on our goods. We can't survive as a nation that only produces what we need, exports produce a signifigant number of jobs and income. This is a classic old world economic view, but it just doesn't work anymore. We have to compete.

 

[Miss Critter]

There's just one problem with that, crank up tarrifs on incoming goods, and our trade partners crank up tarrifs on our goods. We can't survive as a nation that only produces what we need, exports produce a signifigant number of jobs and income. This is a classic old world economic view, but it just doesn't work anymore. We have to compete.

This is very true. The old models are no longer relevant. I believe the "numbers" we use to measure the health of the economy are losing relevance, as well. The fact is, we live in a time of ever-accelerating rate of change. We no longer have the luxury of seeing how things play out over generations.

 

[AAbsolute]

If rather than going to war in the middle east, we gave $500 billion in incentives to create new sources of clean, renewable, cost-efficient energy, we would be ahead by billions of dollars, and could be selling the technology to countries like China and India, who will soon beat us to the punch if we don't get started with vigor.

I've been thinking about this concept of war and its drain on the economy. I really think that Englands occupation and 100 year lease over Hong Kong paid big dividends to the country (or rulers) of England.

There may be a generalized parallel between England's occupation of Hong Kong and United States occupation of the many places we currently occupy. Isn't Halliburton making gains at this time?

In the words of Rafiki, "Look Harder"

 

[florida girl]

I think ethics is what's needed in business today, concern about their neighbor and brother's welfare, and what the end result of unethical behavior is. They are actually cutting off their nose in spite of their face. When the customer goes under, the business goes under. Did anyone read this article?

http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/print/?p=FEJG

The Miami Herald's investigative team reported on Sunday that the state has approved over 10,000 mortgage broker licenses for convicted felons since 2000; over 4,000 were issued to individuals who had been convicted of crimes such as fraud, extortion, racketeering, and bank robbery ? crimes that are specifically prohibited by the licensing statute ? and a smattering of licenses are held by felons convicted of violent crimes including 15 murders. Collectively these felons were guilty of 2,821 financial crimes, including 922 larcenies, 752 frauds, 327 burglaries, 161 forgeries and 67 robberies. The list includes brokers arrested and convicted in Florida, those who had been imprisoned in other states, and those convicted in federal courts.