From a earlier post I was informed that the president is doing great, and because of him helping them 30 big companies on the Dow that it has caused the stock market to be at 13000. although on the surface many may agree I don't find it to be as simple as that. I realize the Dow is above 13000 but if we were to accept this thesis we would realize that there are tough times ahead.Now in no means do I claim to be an Adam smith but I believe that the tax's cuts on personal income,dividends,and capital gains had much to do with the boom of April 2003 coupled with the some 315 billion dollars of (heloc)s by Mr. consumer who was taking advantage of of the new cuts on capital gains tax that started that real estate boom that so many enjoyed.Any classical economist would say that its the Government staying out of the markets which do the greater good.That is the supply side belief, no, I think the little man saw he had equity in his house and said you know I am going to take this money offf my house and go out there and get rich.With out the little man there is no sustain growth for anyone. The banks seeing this made available to the masses anyone who was breathing low interest loans on(heloc)s. Now most thought hell I flip this house yea give me the 3 or 5 year heloc but instead the economy turned south and the little man ended up holding 3 trillion dollars worth of (heloc)s. Many never locked there rates in and now its bank rupt city and you can kiss the real estate market good by for at least 3-5 years.I hope I am wrong but I don't think so.Hell I not smart but thats my story and I am sticking to it.
Edited
Replies
39
SoWal Expert
Bob, but won't that make all of the drug dealers and other black market operatives pay taxes? :funn:
There are also ways to not punish the low income people by giving tax credits back. Check out Boortz and Linder's Fair Tax plan. Also, people living in poverty probably should reconsider having luxuries like cable tv, TV's in general, computers, cell phones (although these may be cheaper than a land line if used in moderation), etc. I see many positives from going to the Fair Tax plan which Boortz and Linder are pushing, and hardly any negatives.
There are also ways to not punish the low income people by giving tax credits back. Check out Boortz and Linder's Fair Tax plan. Also, people living in poverty probably should reconsider having luxuries like cable tv, TV's in general, computers, cell phones (although these may be cheaper than a land line if used in moderation), etc. I see many positives from going to the Fair Tax plan which Boortz and Linder are pushing, and hardly any negatives.
Edited
BannedAuthor
the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Terrorism causes prosperity? How’s that for an economic theory?
That might not be as far-fetched as it sounds. Many economists believe that wars can trigger economic booms, so why should the war on terrorism be any different?
Could one conclude from the supply sided theory that this goes agaisnt it belief of smaller government. It is my understanding that the classical theory which is where supply sided tax cuts are promoted do not factor a war in its thesis.
That might not be as far-fetched as it sounds. Many economists believe that wars can trigger economic booms, so why should the war on terrorism be any different?
Could one conclude from the supply sided theory that this goes agaisnt it belief of smaller government. It is my understanding that the classical theory which is where supply sided tax cuts are promoted do not factor a war in its thesis.
Edited
SoWal Insider
Bob, but won't that make all of the drug dealers and other black market operatives pay taxes? :funn:It would be good to tax the vice industry. Imagine eliminating the national debt through irresponsible behavior.
Beach Fanatic
A creative way to stimulate the economy would be elimination of income tax, combined with a national sales tax. It would stimulate investment from the upper class, and would keep billions in the country currently leaving the economy from illegals. It would discriminate against lower income individuals however.
Completely agree, except potentially on the discrimination part.
BannedAuthor
In what way. Was it not the common man on the street who broke his back for the industry he worked at now entitled to relief of his labor that made all that money to start with,and I would agree if when your referring to vices you are talking about beach houses yachts and things things that were able to be purchased because of the man on the street. How is it so easy to dismiss where the wealth was originated from to start with. When one fails to factor in the man making the wealth its not long there is none. Even a mule gets enough to eat. Fail to take care of the mule and it wont be long you'll be plowing your on fields
Edited
Beach Fanatic
the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Terrorism causes prosperity? How?s that for an economic theory?
Terrible.
Could one conclude from the supply sided theory that this goes agaisnt it belief of smaller government.
No. When you take away money from the government, you force it to either operate on a smaller budget or borrow money to continue to operate on a larger budget. Both eventually shrink the size of the government.
Beach Fanatic
In what way. Was it not the common man on the street who broke his back for the industry he worked for now entitled to relief of his labor that made all that money to start with
The man on the street was paid the market value of his labor. Since it's a whole lot harder to find a good CEO than it is a mailroom attendant, they are paid a lot more. Here, since you editied, I'll add this, from someone other than myself.
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages. Nobody but a beggar chuses to depend chiefly upon the benevolence of his fellow-citizens. Even a beggar does not depend upon it entirely. The charity of well-disposed people, indeed, supplies him with whole fund of his subsistence. But though this principle ultimately provides him with all the necessaries of life which he has occasion for, it neither does nor can provide him with them as he has occasion for them."
BannedAuthor
There is where our roads seperate it is because my belief that as humans we are set on by greed and in no way can you compare the labor of those in the field with the man sitting back and getting fat. History shows us that we are prone to be selfish and want as much as we can get.How can you say right now those mexicans building pcb are getting fair wages when they have to sleep 8 to a room. and don't tell me americans wont do those jobs they just can't afford to live on 1200 a month. Do you look at the contractor and say hey I hope you are paying those men a fair market wage. No, you say I need more tax breaks so I can by my that 10th house.
Edited
BannedAuthor
Very well said. I definitely will read that Quite a few times. I found it to be very insightful.I had never look at it in that way
Edited
Beach Fanatic
There is where our roads seperate it is because my belief that as humans we are set on by greed and in no way can you compare the labor of those in the field with the man sitting back and getting fat. History shows us that we are prone to be selfish and want as much as we can get.How can you say right now those mexicans building pcb are getting fair wages when they have to sleep 8 to a room. and don't tell me americans wont do those jobs they just can't afford to live on 1200 a month. Do you look at the contractor and say hey I hope you are paying those men a fair market wage. No, you say I need more tax breaks so I can by my that 10th house.
Is anyone holding a gun to their head, forcing them to work? Or are they choosing to earn what they are being paid, because there are no better alternatives? (this is where the argument against ?sweat shops? becomes fallacy, by the way) And are there no better alternatives because the laborers were denied entry to colleges, universities, trade schools, etc. based on something other than merit? Milton Friedman, who I quote often said ?The problem of social organization is how to set up an arrangement under which greed will do the least harm, capitalism is that kind of a system.?
BannedAuthor
So you would concede that greed is an enemy to the rich man as well as to the poor. Having said that would you argue that mechanisms should be put into place to some how limit greed from the rich through taxation.Isn't that what is realy being done.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
So you would concede that greed is an enemy to the rich man as well as to the poor.
Yes.
Having said that would you argue that mechanisms should be put into place to some how limit greed from the rich through taxation.
Hell no.
BannedAuthor
I wish I knew a better way, but I just can't find one.
BannedAuthor
Don't think that I've given up on my argument I am just thinking how to phrase my thoughts to see if your argument can stand up.I Will definitely do a little research on Friedman I think you said his name was and see how he stands on supply sided tax cuts in a time of war.and trust me I Will check on that supply demand cure.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.