Socialism cannot compete!

Total Rating:
+92 / -38

329 Comments

    • Fri Oct 31st 14:44 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Personal Income and Spending: Saving is the New Trend (Again)
      Where's the real variation? All I see on the chart is a big boost in disposable income (from the "stimulus" package), and more recently, a dip, as we've all taken a big hit with high gas prices and rising unemployment. Spending looks down slightly, but compared with the income variations, looks like nothing.

      You want to see some *real* change in habits? You have to fundamentally change the economic base -- we need to revoke the income tax, as unconstitutional, and let the owners of the money have what it theirs -- the government has no preemptive right on it. Go to funding solely by a consumptive tax and import taxes - that will boost the domestic economy and American jobs!!
      View article »
    • Fri Oct 31st 11:42 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Nationalizing Detroit? It's a Good Idea
      Bunk!!! That would amount to propping up an industry for which the demand isn't there!! The problem is the unions and the costs that they represent -- it's gotten way disproportionate to the skills needed for the work they do. And this temporary void of auto purchases...it clears up when we fix the macro problems. Let's quit the Marxist nationalizations, which amount to very bad band-aids...and fix the REAL problem!!

      What is the real problem? There are a few core things:
      1) Our base taxation is far too high. It amounts to a much-too-high "first hurdle" for the American worker. Why do you think we go to the "stimulus package" to promote consumer spending spurts in times like this? There's *zero* leeway in middle-American budgets because of the tax load!!
      2) The income tax is *unconstitutional* to begin with. It is directly related to out-of-control government spending, due to the preemptive grab it gives the government on our earnings. If *we* retained the preemptive right to our own money, and *they* got a share when *we* decided to give them some (i.e. consumptive taxes), they could not continue ramping up spending endlessly as they do. Incidentally, the Founders, especially Jefferson -- but others also, were very adamant about which forms of taxation were allowable! And they intended any taxation to be minimal -- not the 40%+ that I, who earn less than 100K/year, pay every 2 weeks for FICA, Medicare, and Fed Income taxes alone!!! It is out of hand, and it is a HUGE barrier to a healthy economy, not to mention our very liberty!!
      3) Socialist entitlements: Spending is out of control, in order to placate segments of the population with entitlements. Only those who are truly physically or mentally incapacitated should receive assistance. Everyone else must EARN THEIR WAY IN THIS WORLD! There is no free lunch, nor ever has been. And the "rest of us" are not only tired of paying for those who *won't* work...we are UNABLE to do so!! Need I even mention the question of the justice of it? End the socialism -- it has never worked in the history of the world...and it is leading to conflicts of interest in large blocks of voters, and huge economic pyramid schemes that are ready to tumble.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 30th 16:28 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco
      @akapital: your textbook definitions amount simply to jumbling the wording a bit...it does *not* change the meaning: government taking from those who produce more and giving to those who produce less. Works in neither theory nor practice.

      Capitalism is not perfect in practice, but it at least is sound in theory, because it espouses the theoretically sound notions that a) nothing is free in life; noone has a *right* to what they do not earn -- it may be granted to them out of generosity -- but generosity implies it be done with the good will of the giver, not by coercion; b) the way to drive efficiency is to reward it.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 30th 13:31 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Bank Bailouts vs. Loans: The Myth
      @Snu: Agreed. I think the way we solve the issue of sales tax affecting the poor more harshly than the wealthy is by the means you suggest: no, or very small, sales tax on essential items such as food and clothing; discretionary consumer goods can be taxed at higher rates. This will also have the side-effect of causing us to think twice about wasteful and excessive consumption in our lifestyle. A true win-win that restores freedom to the people while also helping reign in our tendency to live excessively and with a big footprint.

      I also happen to think you are right about "nothing short of a revolution" being able to bring about this needed change: there is now too large of an entitlement class, and we are seeing a candidate be able to run solely on that basis. He has no other valid standing, that much is clear.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 30th 13:19 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Economic and Financial Bad News
      "But the headline -0.3% figure isn't the worst bit: That would be the 8.7% fall in disposable personal income. If there was any doubt about the outcome of this election, that number alone should put it to rest: There's no way that the incumbent party can win in that kind of economic environment."

      Boy, talk about throwing your biased views out there, Salmon!! Disposable income dives...and you say that's a problem for McCain??? Try talking about what the Marxist Obama tax gestapo will do to our disposable incomes!!!
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 29th 12:58 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Eight Thoughts on the Current Crisis
      @RCA - I agree! And that's what is fueling Obama's candidacy -- the new voting bloc of entitlement voters! What will happen is simply that we reach a point where the Ponzi scheme topples. That's what is happening with Social Security...and you'll notice the new proposals floating to eliminate 401K tax exemptions and add a 5% payroll tax for new government retirement accounts holding bonds paying 3%!! Amounts to new funding source for their rapidly failing socialist retirement entitlements!!

      Add universal healthcare? We just get to fail quicker. Hmmm...maybe that's a *good* thing? I'd rather not take that medicine though.
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 29th 12:54 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco
      @akapital -- "...more equitable distribution does not equal socialism."

      Oh yeah? If you are using tax structures to do so, it certainly does. I'm not sure how else you mean? I think you can effect more equitable distribution by other means...such as abolishing income taxes entirely, and going with sales taxes only. That's really the only just tax. Those who buy luxury goods are obviously going to pay much more. The income tax is fundamentally wrong in principle, since it assumes that the government has a pre-emptive right to what we earn. Noone has a right to what I earn -- and where is the merit in forced giving to those less fortunate? Clearly, voluntary giving has merit, and I think we'd be a much more compassionate society if that was encouraged. Forced giving through taxation breeds resentment.

      To give all the same opportunity, we need to lower the up-front costs -- and that means ditching income taxes. With consumptive taxes, you are in control of how much you give to the government. This has the direct side-effect of returning power to the people, by the way. You wish you could stop the Iraq war? If government funding was based on sales tax, all the citizens would have to do is stop buying discretionary goods...voila - funding cuts. That's the end of unresponsive Congresses.
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 29th 12:46 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      'Fundamental Overhaul' of Financial Regulations Needed
      @RCA: ok, the socialists in Congress decided that we needed wider homeownership...the movement took hold during the Clinton admin, but the push began even earlier. Read up on the Community Reinvestment Act. It's all tied in with ACORN, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, et. al., and yes, Obama. It was the beginning of the subprime lending that is now at the bottom of all this -- their push to lend to those who couldn't afford the mortgage to begin with! ACORN is federally funded as a result of those guys...and Fannie was given quotas for what percentage of loans it purchased had to be subprime...they were *told* to go get more subprime! That directly encouraged banks to lend with lower standards than they should...because they could get the origination fees and then sell it off to Fannie. Our taxes funded a good deal of this. And now we get to fund the fix as well!!

      @JTL: i didn't equate socialism with regulations...and yes, we all know capitalist institutions need *some* regulations. But...that was not the core issue this time -- the issue was the way mortgages were securitized -- the originators no longer had any skin in the game, and could sell off to Fannie & Freddie, who were *encouraged* to increase their share of subprime mortgages! This was direct encouragement to lend without regard to ability to pay it back! My point is simply that that was not a problem with regulation of the private banks, it was a problem with *government* pushing lower standards!! The *regulators* were encouraging laxity!! Yes, some greedy bankers took advantage of that -- but the government & its regulators essentially LAID the opportunity right on their desks!!

      So instead of crying that this economic debacle was capitalism gone awry -- no, it was very much government gone astray!!
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 29th 12:33 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Bank Bailouts vs. Loans: The Myth
      Right on, iThinkBig!!! An historical note regarding socialism in the U.S. -- the Founders were very much against it, as they believed strongly in personal property rights! The settlers of the Plymouth colony in fact tried socialism, with everyone putting into the common store what they were able to produce, and everyone taking as much as they "needed". They found it didn't work -- they had problems with a segment "discovering"... that they need not work very hard at producing, and could just go take what food they needed/desired. They scrapped that setup, and sectioned off plots for each family to farm -- the new arrangement was that you got to keep what you produced, and could sell any excess you didn't need. Worked fabulously.

      People need to take some basic philosophy and logic classes again, in this country! Not to mention history! Read what Jefferson et. al. wrote...they were for minimal government and would never have stood for an income tax! The government having a pre-emptive claim on your earnings? Uh-uh. The philosophically acceptable way for the government to get its limited funding was consumptive taxes -- sales tax & import tariffs. Those leave it up to the *buyer* when and how much tax they pay, based on their purchase decisions. You don't like how the government is currently spending? You stop all discretionary buying for a while...shut off the spigot!

      We've lost a couple basic concepts in the U.S. over recent decades: personal property rights are rapidly vanishing, and government by the people, vs. government *over* the people! Both are largely solved by abolishing the income tax and going solely consumptive, along with a balanced-budget, pay-from-the-coffers government.

      @LariAnn: in short, there should be a tax break not only for the rich, but for all -- because the government *never* should have had a pre-emptive claim on our income!!
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 29th 12:20 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Recessionary Equity Strategies: The Price Is Right
      I agree, this is the time for value...and what is amazing to me is some of the very defensive plays that are extreme values right now! I own KO and CQB. The former was downgraded the other day by S&P based on the structure of its financing -- they basically think KO will be paying too much on its debt. While acknowledging that to be possible, we are seeing credit moving in the right direction again, and KO has good cash flow *and* growth, plus is less discretionary than many other consumables. IMO, a great value below 48. CQB -- this one is unreal: look at the price-to-sales (currently 0.14 for MRQ) and price-to-book (currently 0.55 for MRQ)!! The big drop in oil is a huge boon for their shipping costs...plus, price/lb of bananas has been on the increase. We're not going to stop eating...and in fact, the trend is towards eating more healthfully...this has great momentum for CQB, and with decreasing costs. A real steal. I honestly am looking for a double on CQB within 6 months!!
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 28th 18:41 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      'Fundamental Overhaul' of Financial Regulations Needed
      How about instead of restricting free-market capitalism, we regulate against socialism, which was the CAUSE of the subprime mortgage meltdown!?!
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 28th 15:58 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco
      @bassmaster -- don't be fooled!! Obama's policies will be *impossible* to invest around!!! How can you put a value on anything with socialism being the reigning philosophy?? Big profits are anathema!! Any person or company that makes too much money will have it taken away and "donated" to those who have less. Why bother investing? That basically amounts to a ceiling on the up-side for anyone!!
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 28th 15:54 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Eight Thoughts on the Current Crisis
      @aynrand: we had a gold-backed currency until Nixon took us off in 1971. Are you insinuating that the U.S. economy was worse prior to 1971 than after? As to why they "never lasted" -- it's not a case of "lasting", but a case of having made a *decision* to make the change! We're seeing how well the fiat currency economies are "lasting" right now -- fiat currencies are a big reason for the global ripple effect following economic problems in a single nation.
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 28th 15:40 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Is Too Big to Fail Also Too Big to Save?
      Absolutely!! Irony that the Brits get it? While Americans plunge into socialism!?! We won our freedom from the king abroad only to shackle ourselves here at home. Pitiful. In the process of trying to shore up what had gone astray (and it was a philosophical straying into socialism in the lending arena!), we are straying further into that economic quagmire in our attempts to fix things!!

      Socialism does not work. And as the author points out, the banks and institutions that have made bad decisions have to be allowed to fail...it is the only possible outcome -- anything else will have worse consequences by prolonging the pain, as well as by shifting the pain to the undeserving -- and then the outcome is pain of not just an economic variety -- that sort of injustice invariably begets social unrest. That does not seem to bother U.S. Democrats, nor the Bush administration which is inexplicably acting in accordance with those socialists in these maneuvres!!

      Obama the solution? Not on your life!! He is more of the socialist-Democrat same, but worse!! Be prepared for all-out Marxist assault on capitalism and private property rights. This will beget my corollary to this author's theme: that the real truth to be gleaned from all these recent events is this: we have a government which has failed its purpose and is now too big to save. Ponder that in relation to what you see happening, and in light of the recent proposals being considered by Democrats for grabbing our private 401K retirement savings and nationalizing them -- read between the lines and you see a funding grab for a failing Social Security program. We are seeing the utter failure of socialism, yet the power that it gives to politicians is forcing them to continue grasping with everything they have left. It's time for us to slough it off!!!
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 28th 13:46 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco
      "One reading of the literature leads to the conclusion that, post-smoking, corn is the single worst offender when it comes to boosting health care cost."

      Lost all credibility. Corn <> corn syrup. The former is good for you. The latter...we simply get too much of. Not inherently bad either. Author is an ignorant tool...probably trying to redeem his shorts now that a bottom is in or near and he's getting scared!!
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»