How are we going to pay for all this shit?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

Tax increase discussion among policymakers seems to be moving slowly, but ...

It's beginning to look less and less likely that progressives will get anything close to the tax hikes they desire.

Predictable. Spineless politicians whose only guiding principle is to be re-elected aren't eager to inflict pain on any of their constituents. They may demagogue against the 1%, but when the chips are down they know who their major campaign donors are.

It's sooo much easier to spend, spend, spend on more freebies for your constituents than it is to raise everyone's taxes to pay for them.

We're looking at federal deficits of $2 trillion plus for as far as the eye can see.

Bottom line is we're fucked - unless MMT is validated and we can somehow spend ourselves into oblivion without triggering runaway inflation and dethroning the US dollar as global reserve currency.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Tiny

I see where Schumer said something like this in 2012. Are you aware of anything he's said more recently?



I would like to dedicate the rest of this post to Chung Tran and SpeedRacer. You are intelligent and good writers, and I always enjoy reading your posts. Except for the one about the 300 pound pregnant lactating ghetto hooker on her period that Chung Tran banged in a Redbird Roach Motel: https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2675863

However, on the subject of tax policy, you gentlemen have lived your lives in darkness. I sincerely hope that this parable from Captain Midnight's link will enable you to know the truth, so that you may live your remaining years in a state of enlightenment. Higher and higher taxes are not a good thing. They kill the goose that laid the golden egg:

When a tax is levied on buyers, the demand curve shifts downward in accordance with the size of the tax. Similarly, when tax is levied on sellers, the supply curve shifts upward by the size of tax. When the tax is imposed, the price paid by buyers increases, and the price received by seller decreases. Therefore, buyers and sellers share the burden of the tax, regardless of how it is imposed. Since a tax places a "wedge" between the price buyers pay and the price sellers get, the quantity sold is reduced below the level that it would be without tax. To put it another way, a tax on good causes the size of market for that good to decrease.

For example, suppose that Will is a cleaner who is working in the cleaning service company and Amie hired Will to clean her room every week for $100. The opportunity cost of Will's time is $80, while the value of a clean house to Amie is $120. Hence, each of them get same amount of benefit from their deal. Amie and Will each receive a benefit of $20, making the total surplus from trade $40.

However, if the government were to decide to impose a $50 tax upon the providers of cleaning services, their trade would no longer benefit them. Amie would not be willing to pay any price above $120, and Will would no longer receive a payment that exceeds his opportunity cost. As a result, not only do Amie and Will both give up the deal, but Amie has to live in a dirtier house, and Will does not receive his desired income. They have thus lost amount of the surplus that they would have received from their deal, and at the same time, this made each of them worse off to the tune of $40 in value.

Government revenue is also affected by this tax: since Amie and Will have abandoned the deal, the government also loses any tax revenue that would have resulted from wages. This $40 is referred to as the deadweight loss. It causes losses for both buyers and sellers in a market, as well as decreasing government revenues. Taxes cause deadweight losses because they prevent buyers and sellers from realizing some of the gains from trade.

Tiny, not sure what I've said in the past on tax policy with which you disagree. I have recently said I support raising the corporate tax to about 25% but not the 28% I believe Biden is proposing. I have also recently said I don't know the plans for paying for all the proposed spending.

To what comments are you referring?

[bambino]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Predictable. Spineless politicians whose only guiding principle is to be re-elected aren't eager to inflict pain on any of their constituents. They may demagogue against the 1%, but when the chips are down they know who their major campaign donors are.

It's sooo much easier to spend, spend, spend on more freebies for your constituents than it is to raise everyone's taxes to pay for them.

We're looking at federal deficits of $2 trillion plus for as far as the eye can see.

Bottom line is we're fucked - unless MMT is validated and we can somehow spend ourselves into oblivion without triggering runaway inflation and dethroning the US dollar as global reserve currency.

It’s been in the works for years;



https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/ru...-dollar-assets

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Tiny, not sure what I've said in the past on tax policy with which you disagree. I have recently said I support raising the corporate tax to about 25% but not the 28% I believe Biden is proposing. I have also recently said I don't know the plans for paying for all the proposed spending.

To what comments are you referring?

Apologies SpeedRacer. I just did a search of old threads and indeed you're not in desperate need of enlightenment on taxes. I was thinking about this exchange, and my memory had faded,

https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1061430824

You see, I thought I'd hooked you and was going to reel you in. You were to be the first convert to the Free Markets Church of Tiny. But I couldn't quite get you there. Although I tried. I really tried.

That said, I would much rather be governed by people like you instead of the the current bunch in Washington. You're a reasonable person. If you ever run for office, please let me know and I'll contribute to your campaign, unless you're running against someone like Gary Johnson.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Predictable. Spineless politicians whose only guiding principle is to be re-elected aren't eager to inflict pain on any of their constituents. They may demagogue against the 1%, but when the chips are down they know who their major campaign donors are.

It's sooo much easier to spend, spend, spend on more freebies for your constituents than it is to raise everyone's taxes to pay for them.

We're looking at federal deficits of $2 trillion plus for as far as the eye can see.

Bottom line is we're fucked - unless MMT is validated and we can somehow spend ourselves into oblivion without triggering runaway inflation and dethroning the US dollar as global reserve currency.

I read that Biden's own budget, including both his proposed spending and proposed tax increases, calls for net federal debt (debt owned by the public) to be 117% of GDP around 10 years from now.

What worries me as much as the debt is the transition of the USA from comparatively low government expenditures and low taxes to something like France.

I recently completed my Greatest Piece of Work for eccie, a comparison of the five developed countries with the lowest government expenditures as a % of GDP (Low Spending Countries) to the five with the highest (High Spending Countries). This will be the subject of a future thread. I fully expect to be awarded the Nobel Price in Economics for this, even though I'm not an economist.

Here's a teaser. The high spending countries are France, Finland, Denmark, Belgium and Italy. And the low spending countries are Ireland, the USA, Switzerland, Singapore, and Hong Kong.

The low spending countries happen to be the five wealthiest in the world, in per capita terms, when you kick out tiny countries and petrostates.

Here are comparative numbers:

Low Spending Countries:
Average GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power, 2019: $78,300 per person
Average GDP annual growth, 2010 to 2019: 3.8%
Average Government Expenditures as a % of GDP in 2018: 25.2%
Average Government Revenues as a % of GDP in 2018: 25.5%

High Spending Countries:
Average GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power, 2019: $53,665
Average annual GDP growth, 2010 to 2019: 1.3%
Average Government Expenditures as a % of GDP: 52.4%
Average Government Revenues as a % of GDP: 51.3%

So GDP per capita for the Low Spending Countries is 46% higher than the High Spending Countries. And average GDP growth was almost 3X higher! Although admittedly without Ireland and Singapore, average GDP growth would have only been 80% higher.

Every one of the Low Spending Countries outperformed the High Spending Countries in both average GDP growth and GDP per capita, with one exception. Denmark's average annual GDP growth was 2%, and Switzerland's was 1.92%.

[DesWad]

We need to keep Trump in office as long as possible, perhaps until his death so that these kinds of problems can be solved.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by DTickler

We need to keep Trump in office as long as possible, perhaps until his death so that these kinds of problems can be solved.

Trump would bankrupt this shit show. Maybe he already has?????

[DesWad]

Originally Posted by bambino

Trump would bankrupt this shit show. Maybe he already has?????

when did you flip sides?

[bambino]

Originally Posted by DTickler

when did you flip sides?

I didn’t. I think he would bankrupt this country due to fraudulent spending. Doesn’t China hold most of our debt? DUH, do you actually think your taxes go to the US government? No, to the Central banking system. I guess you’re not paying attention. Putin kicked the central bank out and restored to the gold standard in Russia. China is also doing some moves. Bottomline, the dollar will not be the fiat currency in the world. The sooner we get on the gold standard the better. Joey Bribes is printing fake money.

[DesWad]

Originally Posted by bambino

I didn’t. I think he would bankrupt this country due to fraudulent spending. Doesn’t China hold most of our debt? DUH, do you actually think your taxes go to the US government? No, to the Central banking system. I guess you’re not paying attention. Putin kicked the central bank out and restored to the gold standard in Russia. China is also doing some moves. Bottomline, the dollar will not be the fiat currency in the world. The sooner we get on the gold standard the better. Joey Bribes is printing fake money.

Trump wanted to be back on the gold standard. China has been dumping US debt for about 5 years now. It will take them about 40 more years to dump it too...So you are a non Trump supporting Republican? Trump may have said some stupid shit but he did more for this nation than any other President since the Roosevelt days.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by DTickler

Trump wanted to be back on the gold standard. China has been dumping US debt for about 5 years now. It will take them about 40 more years to dump it too...So you are a non Trump supporting Republican? Trump may have said some stupid shit but he did more for this nation than any other President since the Roosevelt days.

Hey, give Bambino a break, I'm the only non Trump supporting Republican on this site. Just kidding about giving him a break, I'm almost 100% sure he agrees with everything you've written in this thread. When he said "bankrupt the shit show" he probably means "end the spending lunacy," not "bankrupt the country."

[Ripmany]

Shit don't cost much get a garden and use it as fertilizer.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Ripmany

Shit don't cost much get a garden and use it as fertilizer.

Thanks for the advice. I’ve made it clear in this forum that I prefer to shit on my neighbor’s lawn. Please see Vitaman’s “A new low for Trump supporters” thread.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Apologies SpeedRacer. I just did a search of old threads and indeed you're not in desperate need of enlightenment on taxes. I was thinking about this exchange, and my memory had faded,

https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1061430824

You see, I thought I'd hooked you and was going to reel you in. You were to be the first convert to the Free Markets Church of Tiny. But I couldn't quite get you there. Although I tried. I really tried.

That said, I would much rather be governed by people like you instead of the the current bunch in Washington. You're a reasonable person. If you ever run for office, please let me know and I'll contribute to your campaign, unless you're running against someone like Gary Johnson.

I remember having the debate a while back and I think both of us made very reasonable defenses of our positions. Sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong. There are many people who are much more astute on issues than I am and I will give them credit when due.

[Texas Contrarian]

.

Originally Posted by bambino

I didn’t. I think he would bankrupt this country due to fraudulent spending. Doesn’t China hold most of our debt? DUH, do you actually think your taxes go to the US government? No, to the Central banking system. I guess you’re not paying attention. Putin kicked the central bank out and restored to the gold standard in Russia. China is also doing some moves. Bottomline, the dollar will not be the fiat currency in the world. The sooner we get on the gold standard the better. Joey Bribes is printing fake money.

Say what?!?

Russia has not gone on the gold standard, and neither has China. And neither will.

Both nations have been accumulating gold reserves and seemingly are intent on continuing to do so in the future. But that isn't remotely tantamount to placing the nation's currency on anything resembling the classical gold standard.

And, no, China does not "hold most of our debt." (Only a very small percentage of it.)

And somehow you believe that "the sooner we get on the gold standard, the better?" Seriously?

Do you realize what that means? Great Depression 2.0, overnight.

No politician is going there, obviously. Severe financial crises and economic depressions don't exactly make a big hit with voters!

.