• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jobless Rate in US Falls to 5.9% in September, Payrolls Jump

What would the money be used for if not for spending or paying down the deficit? Are you suggesting that it would all just be collected in burlap bags and buried?

Actually I think they used stainless steel boxes now.
 
Projections based on an uninformed opinion are... piss poor projections! It's not like i expected you to provide anything of value to begin with :shrug:.

Ah a personal attack, very valuable. :roll:
 
BTW, did I mention that since Obama took office, by my calculations, 1,001,000 less Americans under 55 are employed...but 5,417,000 more Americans over 55 are employed!?!

I did?

Okay.


BTW, once again, I am neither Dem nor Rep.

Kind of an anecdote here but I noticed after the economic collapse around 2007... From that point forward fast food employee ages seemed to skyrocket. It was weird. I later read that the average age of ff workers climbed to over 30 but you could just see it happening. It was depressing to see but Tue good thing about it was they were ****ing up less orders than the dont give a crap kids do.

Now it seems the age is dropping again or replaced by upper aged Mexican nationals who've come up. And the orders are always jacked up again like the good old days.
 
Kind of an anecdote here but I noticed after the economic collapse around 2007... From that point forward fast food employee ages seemed to skyrocket. It was weird. I later read that the average age of ff workers climbed to over 30 but you could just see it happening. It was depressing to see but Tue good thing about it was they were ****ing up less orders than the dont give a crap kids do.

Now it seems the age is dropping again or replaced by upper aged Mexican nationals who've come up. And the orders are always jacked up again like the good old days.

My kid calls one of our local McDonalds, "MexiDonalds", because it has so many hispanic workers. However it is the best McDonalds (fastest and most accurate) that I have ever seen.
 
The retirement age has shifted from 60 to 62 (average).



Here's some more data simply on the population past current and projected.:

Retirement Policy: The U.S. Population is Aging

Chart-2.gif
 
Ah a personal attack, very valuable. :roll:

You made a ridiculous statement that adds zero value to this discussion. Low-level partisan hackery has no power here.
 
Projections based on an uninformed opinion are... piss poor projections! It's not like i expected you to provide anything of value to begin with :shrug:.



Given the fact that the numbers on the spending from the Failed Stimulus come from the government, the only thing we know with absolute certainty is that the numbers are fudged.

That said, the spending on infrastructure gets interpreted as somewhere between 30 billion and 100 billion.

The total bill was was about 787 billion and much of that is still unspent.

Google where the Stimulus dollars went and the answers to where the cash went fall into a pretty broad range.


The Stimulus Plan: How to Spend $787 Billion - The New York Times
Debunking Stimulus Myth: Only 3% Allotted for Road, Bridge Infrastructure Spending | Media Research Center
Ezra Klein - Didn't the stimulus take care of our infrastructure needs?
 
That would seem to reflect more the attitude of Conservatives as Liberals view them.
Really? Have you heard of Ezekiel Emmanuel's 'Complete lives system'? Or Obamacare?
 
What would the money be used for if not for spending or paying down the deficit? Are you suggesting that it would all just be collected in burlap bags and buried?
Social justice, ie redistribution
 
Social justice, ie redistribution

That qualifies as "spending" then. So any money taxed away from the private sector is then returned to the private sector. The point is it isn't destroyed or removed from our economy.

Personally I don't think that's the best way to do it, I despise means tested welfare as it only serves to lock people into poverty, but I'd love to see more money being spent to rebuild our infrastructure, and infrastructure investment is the type of spending that pays for itself (over time) because it promotes private sector expansion. If we didn't built the interstate highway system, and sea ports and airports, way back then, our private sector would not be nearly as robust or as large as it is today.
 
The money is imaginary or electronic.

They bury it in BS.

Electronic or not, it's not buried, it's spent back into the private sector economy.
 
Electronic or not, it's not buried, it's spent back into the private sector economy.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101354173

<snip>
According to Thomson Reuters data, companies around the world held almost $7 trillion of cash and equivalents on their balance sheets at the end of 2013 - more than twice the level of 10 years ago. Capital expenditure relative to sales is at a 22-year low and some strategists reckon the typical age of fixed assets and equipment has been stretched to as much as 14 years from pre-crisis norms of about 9 years.

<snip>
 
Last edited:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101354173

<snip>
According to Thomson Reuters data, companies around the world held almost $7 trillion of cash and equivalents on their balance sheets at the end of 2013 - more than twice the level of 10 years ago. Capital expenditure relative to sales is at a 22-year low and some strategists reckon the typical age of fixed assets and equipment has been stretched to as much as 14 years from pre-crisis norms of about 9 years.

<snip>

You just made a darned good argument for higher corporate taxes, and totally disproved the theory that a lack of capital is the cause of our economic woes. There simply isn't enough demand to warrant companies investing in new equipment or expanding the production. If we could get part of that $7 trillion back into active circulation, then demand would increase enough to justify producers expanding.
 
Last edited:
You just made a darned good argument for higher corporate taxes, and totally disproved the theory that a lack of capital is the cause of our economic woes. There simply isn't enough demand to warrant companies investing in new equipment or expanding the production. If we could get part of that $7 trillion back into active circulation, then demand would increase enough to justify producers expanding.



And your solution is to tax business activity at a higher rate?
 
And your solution is to tax business activity at a higher rate?

It's not that simple. My solution would be demand side oriented. Taxation on the rich makes very little difference to our economy one way or another. Tax policy on the worker-consumer class, which happens to be the group that is responsible for most of our demand, makes a huge economic difference.

We should shift tax burden from the non-rich to the rich in a revenue neutral fashion, as to allow the non-rich to be able to create more demand. When demand increases, businesses expand, profits go up, more jobs are created, and the size of our pie grows. this is real wealth creation that can result in a larger size slice of pie for every income class, rich, poor, and everywhere in betwix.
 
That qualifies as "spending" then. So any money taxed away from the private sector is then returned to the private sector. The point is it isn't destroyed or removed from our economy.

Personally I don't think that's the best way to do it, I despise means tested welfare as it only serves to lock people into poverty, but I'd love to see more money being spent to rebuild our infrastructure, and infrastructure investment is the type of spending that pays for itself (over time) because it promotes private sector expansion. If we didn't built the interstate highway system, and sea ports and airports, way back then, our private sector would not be nearly as robust or as large as it is today.

Then tie this welfare to actual infrastructure projects. Want a check? get to work on I-85 between Greenville and Spartanburg.

You know that some studies about different places in America were done over the summer about those that collect benefits, and it was shown that in some places total benefit payments collected by people were totaling over $50K per year when added up...I work my ass off for that level of pay, and these people check the mailbox once, or twice a month. So, does it burn my ass? You're damned right it does. But do I think that liberals that use this resource to buy their votes is going to let it become a work for pay project, not a chance.
 
It's not that simple. My solution would be demand side oriented. Taxation on the rich makes very little difference to our economy one way or another. Tax policy on the worker-consumer class, which happens to be the group that is responsible for most of our demand, makes a huge economic difference.

We should shift tax burden from the non-rich to the rich in a revenue neutral fashion, as to allow the non-rich to be able to create more demand. When demand increases, businesses expand, profits go up, more jobs are created, and the size of our pie grows. this is real wealth creation that can result in a larger size slice of pie for every income class, rich, poor, and everywhere in betwix.



Demand is created by offering things that people want.

If the people need a device for all of the various and sundry functions and there is none, the demand is still there, but the purchases are not being made.

In the 90's, that unknown device was the personal computer. When the device was created, not really much demand. There was no "killer app".

However, then the suite of Microsoft programs came into being and presto, there was demand. The demand created the purchasing and the purchasing fired up the economy and the upward thrust of the economy was begun by the demand that produced the production that added more money to the consumers and the wealth spread across the economy.

Obviously, the same thing happens whether the boom starts in the tech sector of the energy sector or the transportation actor.

If tomorrow, an engine was produced that powered vehicles on hydrogen harvested from the air that produced clean, fresh water as the exhaust, every car owner, fleet owner and hobbyist would want one and the economic boom would make the 90's look like the 30's.

If the product exists to create the demand, the money to buy the product will appear as if by magic.

Even if the money is available in great quantity to buy a product that does not exist, no purchase will be made.
 
Demand is created by offering things that people want.

If the people need a device for all of the various and sundry functions and there is none, the demand is still there, but the purchases are not being made.

In the 90's, that unknown device was the personal computer. When the device was created, not really much demand. There was no "killer app".

However, then the suite of Microsoft programs came into being and presto, there was demand. The demand created the purchasing and the purchasing fired up the economy and the upward thrust of the economy was begun by the demand that produced the production that added more money to the consumers and the wealth spread across the economy.

Obviously, the same thing happens whether the boom starts in the tech sector of the energy sector or the transportation actor.

If tomorrow, an engine was produced that powered vehicles on hydrogen harvested from the air that produced clean, fresh water as the exhaust, every car owner, fleet owner and hobbyist would want one and the economic boom would make the 90's look like the 30's.

If the product exists to create the demand, the money to buy the product will appear as if by magic.

Even if the money is available in great quantity to buy a product that does not exist, no purchase will be made.
this is not how demand works


you mistake it for supply side economics
 
Then tie this welfare to actual infrastructure projects. Want a check? get to work on I-85 between Greenville and Spartanburg.

You know that some studies about different places in America were done over the summer about those that collect benefits, and it was shown that in some places total benefit payments collected by people were totaling over $50K per year when added up...I work my ass off for that level of pay, and these people check the mailbox once, or twice a month. So, does it burn my ass? You're damned right it does. But do I think that liberals that use this resource to buy their votes is going to let it become a work for pay project, not a chance.
you think that infant that was not aborted, but was instead born to a single mother, is going to be able to build that stretch of I-85. damn little layabout will sleep most of the time and then eat government provided food from the WIC program. damned welfare baby needs to start pulling his own weight [/sarcasm for those who need the clue]
 
you think that infant that was not aborted, but was instead born to a single mother, is going to be able to build that stretch of I-85. damn little layabout will sleep most of the time and then eat government provided food from the WIC program. damned welfare baby needs to start pulling his own weight [/sarcasm for those who need the clue]

Good God you are so dishonest....Do us a favor and don't post anything else until you can be adult about it.
 
Then tie this welfare to actual infrastructure projects. Want a check? get to work on I-85 between Greenville and Spartanburg.

You know that some studies about different places in America were done over the summer about those that collect benefits, and it was shown that in some places total benefit payments collected by people were totaling over $50K per year when added up...I work my ass off for that level of pay, and these people check the mailbox once, or twice a month. So, does it burn my ass? You're damned right it does. But do I think that liberals that use this resource to buy their votes is going to let it become a work for pay project, not a chance.

I don't disagree.

I'm all for ending means tested welfare freebies and creating more infrastructure jobs with that money. It seems like money better spent, and instead of locking slackers into poverty with no real return on our tax dollars, we would start creating a culture of working for money, with the creation of valuable infrastructure (leading to more private sector jobs) as a huge bonus.
 
Good God you are so dishonest....Do us a favor and don't post anything else until you can be adult about it.

figured you were not up to comprehending the point i was making
here's a clue. i am typing it slowly, so keep up:
many who benefit from government assistance do so thru no fault of their own. they may be too young, too feeble, too sick, too mentally challenged, too whatever to pay their own way. yet you ignore them and their plight when you fashion the most simplistic solution to allow them to feed/clothe/house themselves ... by building a new stretch of I-85 between spartanburg and greenville. as if that would be something the very young, the very old, and the very infirm would be able to do. your "solution" could only be found workable by simple minds
 
figured you were not up to comprehending the point i was making
here's a clue. i am typing it slowly, so keep up:
many who benefit from government assistance do so thru no fault of their own. they may be too young, too feeble, too sick, too mentally challenged, too whatever to pay their own way. yet you ignore them and their plight when you fashion the most simplistic solution to allow them to feed/clothe/house themselves ... by building a new stretch of I-85 between spartanburg and greenville. as if that would be something the very young, the very old, and the very infirm would be able to do. your "solution" could only be found workable by simple minds

And you use a narrow example, and extremes of the system to give all of the others in the majority a pass for grafting every single one of us....And all to lock them into the plantation of poverty for their vote...You should be ashamed...
 
Demand is created by offering things that people want....

To an extent, yes. However, there is no lack of companies willing to create things that people want, the profit motive is very powerful, and it exists regardless of anything else, as long as we allow private ownership of the means of production (and last time I checked, we do).

Production is the natural result of demand. it's like almost automatically going to happen, as long as demand is realized. Someone orders something, and it's produced. someone purchases something off the shelf, and a replacement is produced.

However, demand is created when people who want things have the means to actually purchase those things. Regardless of how much the owners of the means of production desire to produce, they will not produce more than their customers can actually afford to purchase. So customers with a buck in their pocket is a prerequisite for production to exist.

If you made widgets, and you were only able to sell 100 widgets a day, would you produce any more than that? Would you desire to fill up warehouses with excess widgets?
 
Back
Top Bottom