The Metastasizing State-Bankruptcy Meme [View article]
You maybe unaware of the size of property taxes. Excuse my bluntness, but the concept of taking productive money and throwing it to all kinds of pet projects and overpaid bureaucracy is just a dumb idea. We pay enough in taxes; the issue is that they are spent much faster!
I don't agree with you or Edmund Andrews. Buffett is just another scapegoat in a long list. Funny, though, how that list excludes many Congressmen and politicos. Oh, let's not forget that these types of hearings are nothing more than public attantion grabbers. Whoever is put in the chair is mocked, villified and degraded. It is all part of the spiel.
As details of the plan to reduce federal spending by $38.5B are posted, the backlash is building among those who say the cuts "mostly aren't real." The impetus may have been an AP report that says most of the cuts "either affect future budgets or amount to accounting gimmicks that won't reduce actual spending." [View news story]
The President lied to us?!? I am shocked! ... Not really; given the string of lies he has already told this should have been expected. Boener, on the other hand, needs to be slapped around for going along with the lie. Spineless on his part.
Rep. Paul Ryan releases a new deficit reduction proposal that claims to cut $5.8T in spending over the next decade and includes major changes to Medicare and Medicaid. These problems won't get fixed because (choose one): A. they're unworkable; or B. politicians and voters don't have the stomach for such deep cuts. [View news story]
First, based on several of such pieces related to the budget that have gone through SeekingAlpha I have a feeling that the editor has a definitive affinity for Democrats agenda. Krugman seems to be quoted daily.
Second, I think there is enough anxiety among the electorate that a cut of large magnitude will become possible.
Third, it is EASY to find large magnitude of savings when the spending has gone so out of control over the last 5 years.
The S&P warning on U.S. debt was silent on the real danger to the economy and the federal budget: Growth could be derailed by letting too-big-to-fail banks become irresponsible again or by allowing continually rising healthcare costs, Simon Johnson writes. He fears S&P's "broad-brush" warning could whip up debt hysteria and push policies that quickly undermine growth. [View news story]
Michael,
I don't buy the argument that taxes NEED to go up. You have erroneous information that our taxes are too low (just add ALL taxes we pay, not just federal income taxes). They are not. Our issue is a spending issue. Only once in history has government spending been at this level as a percent of GDP -- it was during World War II.
Your position -- actually it is Obama's position -- is that we need to raise taxes and cut spending less. Yet nobody is asking why we pumped up spending over the last 2 years so much? Is cutting from this hugely inflated spending level really 'cutting' or is it merely pairing down to prior levels, while just increasing taxes. Nobody can explain to me why we have to fund the huge government bureaucracy and their fat-cat compensation and benefits. And we need to stop hiding behind 'money for the poor' ideology: much of the money gets eaten by the bureaucracy or goes to pay people not to work. None of it does anything to give people an incentive to seek work and better their future.
Dr. Keynes is killing the patient, Michael Pento writes. Most Americans know intuitively that reducing their debt burden is in their best interests, but "a few hundred individuals in government believe they know better than the collective wisdom of the entire free market... they are forbidding us from following the common sense path to fiscal health." [View news story]
I wish the Keynesians will take a moment and read this article. Machiavelli999 and the spend-it ilk are so engrossed into the formulas that they forget common sense. There is no empirical evidence that debt-fueled government spending ever lead to economic prosperity. We should recognize that the government is always and ever an inefficient spender. It tends to waste money on non-productive endeavors and has to tax the productive activity to pay for them. This ALWAYS results in a slower growth and higher misery for the society.
We have already spent the money of the next four generations. Japan has spent the money of the next eight. Little good that has done to them as they are about to celebrate their third decade of slow to no growth. Rather than continue to throw away our money to non-productive use, we should cut the fat -- yes, that would include large-scale layoffs of government workers at federal, state and local levels -- and cut taxes to the productive private sector. If history is any guide, growth of 5%+ will follow in 6-9 months. You can read about this inconvenient (to Keynesians) fact here: www.cato.org/pub_displ...
Despite cries that letting the Bush tax cuts die would kill any recovery, few dare utter an uncomfortable reality, according to Gregg Easterbrook: Taxes should rise for everyone, not just for the rich. Americans think they're clobbered by onerous taxes, but U.S. taxes are relatively low compared to the rest of the world, and federal income taxes have fallen dramatically. [View news story]
B/S. Rising taxes WILL NOT lower the deficit. The politicians will just have more money to spend. The only way out is: cut taxes, starve Washington of money for pet projects. Slash spending. Period. The tax level is turning us into slaves -- working most of the year for someone else!!!
Why a Windfall Profit Tax Is Needed for Oil Companies [View article]
A brilliant idea! ... Not really. Sure, let's blame the oil companies for the money printing operations of the central banks in the U.S. and Europe, because surely the debasing of currency does NOT influence physical assets expressed in them (just ask Bernanke, he will confirm today). Let's also blame them for all the instability in the Middle East that has cut the supply of crude. Let's continue with the blame and lay out on them the deep-water drilling ban that cut our access to oil (and constrained supply as well). Finally, let's blame them for all our loonie 'clean fuel' ideas that keep us dependent on oil. Natural gas vehicles anyone? Nah, that would be too easy. We want ethanol, 'cause we want to starve the poor buggers in developing nations who depend on corn for much of their daily food or to feed their animals, plus we really want the guys down in Brazil to cut down the Amazonian jungle and make more land to plant the corn on. Nothing helps speed that up than a high corn price. Finally, let's not forget that to make ethanol 'competitive' we, the taxpayers, need to subsidies producers ('cause you know, the like of ADM are really struggling without it) for 30% of their costs ... and that leads us back to oil, because wouldn't it be funny if we make them PAY that imagined windfall profits tax to fund those subsidies?
What a collection of brilliant ideas. Only drugged-up quasi-scientiests and government geniuses could come up with it ...
Ireland in Decline, Or, What Austerity Looks Like [View article]
I am a bit surprised to discover so many Keynsian supporters; or maybe they use Keynes to support the ever-increasing government spending.
The argument that government spending must offset private spending has always had two fundamental flaws for me: namely, that governments never seem to withdraw spending after private spending picks up and that government spending often, if not always, is wasteful.
Ireland went in the wrong direction not because it cut spending, but because it raised taxes. They should have cut spending and left taxes alone.
Our infrastructure is in crisis, and the federal government has to step up and do something to fix it, says former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell. Many of the problems aren't local, but regional in nature and need a federal approach. His big government fix? Create a National Infrastructure Bank and pass a transportation bill that will pump around $200B a year into the bank over the next 6 years to fund improvements. (video) [View news story]
I wish we actually start building quality roads, rather than a one-season pavements. Our quality is shit. I live in Michigan and see roads in repair every year, yet the roads are still full of potholes. Cross the boarder to Canada and it becomes a different world. Am yet to see a road repair barrel there.
"Flirting" with a lost decade? We're already three years in, Paul Krugman asserts. The question isn’t whether our flirtation with a lost decade will turn into something serious; it’s whether the lost decade can somehow be broken up. All we've seen is an economy that has stopped its free fall, but without any real recovery. [View news story]
Krugman is wrong again. We haven't stopped the free fall -- we are still falling if one is to look at the deteriorating employment. The way out of this mess is to invite the private sector to offer the solutions. A great first step is to slash spending by 23%, offer a tax holiday on money repatriation for firms, cut corporate tax rate to 20% (and close all special loopholes, credits and deductions) and ban unions in the public sector.
Colombia agrees to rework labor laws and crack down on violence against union organizers in a deal with the Obama administration, clearing the way for a free-trade agreement to be considered by Congress. The deal would give the U.S. access to Colombian markets without current custom duties and could increase exports by more than $1B/year. [View news story]
Ah, why am I not surprised to see unions stand in a way of free trade. I will condemn violence against ANY human being. Yet it is not right to hold up trade agreement that benefits vast number of people because of demand for more unions in other countries ... Reference to the 'rework labor laws' requirement.
The only way to solve the deficit is to expand the economic pie. This is precisely what the tax cuts will do.
I wish we follow this up by eliminating a few hundred thousand government fat-cats, as the deficit commission advised. This will ensure we BOTH grow and cut wasteful spending.
The Metastasizing State-Bankruptcy Meme [View article]
Buffett's PR Disaster [View article]
As details of the plan to reduce federal spending by $38.5B are posted, the backlash is building among those who say the cuts "mostly aren't real." The impetus may have been an AP report that says most of the cuts "either affect future budgets or amount to accounting gimmicks that won't reduce actual spending." [View news story]
Rep. Paul Ryan releases a new deficit reduction proposal that claims to cut $5.8T in spending over the next decade and includes major changes to Medicare and Medicaid. These problems won't get fixed because (choose one): A. they're unworkable; or B. politicians and voters don't have the stomach for such deep cuts. [View news story]
Second, I think there is enough anxiety among the electorate that a cut of large magnitude will become possible.
Third, it is EASY to find large magnitude of savings when the spending has gone so out of control over the last 5 years.
The S&P warning on U.S. debt was silent on the real danger to the economy and the federal budget: Growth could be derailed by letting too-big-to-fail banks become irresponsible again or by allowing continually rising healthcare costs, Simon Johnson writes. He fears S&P's "broad-brush" warning could whip up debt hysteria and push policies that quickly undermine growth. [View news story]
I don't buy the argument that taxes NEED to go up. You have erroneous information that our taxes are too low (just add ALL taxes we pay, not just federal income taxes). They are not. Our issue is a spending issue. Only once in history has government spending been at this level as a percent of GDP -- it was during World War II.
Your position -- actually it is Obama's position -- is that we need to raise taxes and cut spending less. Yet nobody is asking why we pumped up spending over the last 2 years so much? Is cutting from this hugely inflated spending level really 'cutting' or is it merely pairing down to prior levels, while just increasing taxes. Nobody can explain to me why we have to fund the huge government bureaucracy and their fat-cat compensation and benefits. And we need to stop hiding behind 'money for the poor' ideology: much of the money gets eaten by the bureaucracy or goes to pay people not to work. None of it does anything to give people an incentive to seek work and better their future.
We do agree on Donald. I am no fan of his.
Dr. Keynes is killing the patient, Michael Pento writes. Most Americans know intuitively that reducing their debt burden is in their best interests, but "a few hundred individuals in government believe they know better than the collective wisdom of the entire free market... they are forbidding us from following the common sense path to fiscal health." [View news story]
We have already spent the money of the next four generations. Japan has spent the money of the next eight. Little good that has done to them as they are about to celebrate their third decade of slow to no growth. Rather than continue to throw away our money to non-productive use, we should cut the fat -- yes, that would include large-scale layoffs of government workers at federal, state and local levels -- and cut taxes to the productive private sector. If history is any guide, growth of 5%+ will follow in 6-9 months. You can read about this inconvenient (to Keynesians) fact here: www.cato.org/pub_displ...
Despite cries that letting the Bush tax cuts die would kill any recovery, few dare utter an uncomfortable reality, according to Gregg Easterbrook: Taxes should rise for everyone, not just for the rich. Americans think they're clobbered by onerous taxes, but U.S. taxes are relatively low compared to the rest of the world, and federal income taxes have fallen dramatically. [View news story]
Why a Windfall Profit Tax Is Needed for Oil Companies [View article]
What a collection of brilliant ideas. Only drugged-up quasi-scientiests and government geniuses could come up with it ...
Ireland in Decline, Or, What Austerity Looks Like [View article]
The argument that government spending must offset private spending has always had two fundamental flaws for me: namely, that governments never seem to withdraw spending after private spending picks up and that government spending often, if not always, is wasteful.
Ireland went in the wrong direction not because it cut spending, but because it raised taxes. They should have cut spending and left taxes alone.
Our infrastructure is in crisis, and the federal government has to step up and do something to fix it, says former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell. Many of the problems aren't local, but regional in nature and need a federal approach. His big government fix? Create a National Infrastructure Bank and pass a transportation bill that will pump around $200B a year into the bank over the next 6 years to fund improvements. (video) [View news story]
"Flirting" with a lost decade? We're already three years in, Paul Krugman asserts. The question isn’t whether our flirtation with a lost decade will turn into something serious; it’s whether the lost decade can somehow be broken up. All we've seen is an economy that has stopped its free fall, but without any real recovery. [View news story]
Colombia agrees to rework labor laws and crack down on violence against union organizers in a deal with the Obama administration, clearing the way for a free-trade agreement to be considered by Congress. The deal would give the U.S. access to Colombian markets without current custom duties and could increase exports by more than $1B/year. [View news story]
A Stimulus by Any Other Name [View article]
I wish we follow this up by eliminating a few hundred thousand government fat-cats, as the deficit commission advised. This will ensure we BOTH grow and cut wasteful spending.
Krugman's Mind Blindness [View article]
Isn't the (almost) $4 trillion of federal annual spending already in the 'spend some' category?
Why This Summer, The Odds Favor a Declining Market [View article]