• 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!

US unemployment rate reaches 7.6%

I don't believe tax cuts would be neccesary if the american people receive enough money to help with the mortgage crisis along with reform on availability to recieve loans
Ok, so...
Seems to me that if the $x they get from a tax cut doesnt help them, then the $x they get from a government spending program won't hellp them to the same degree.

Given that, why NOT the tax cut, and WHY the spending program?

Overseas profits should be highly taxed and replace the money the government gives for handouts
The US governent doesnt have the power to tax profits for a company that doesnt do buisness here...
 
Sorry, the economic issue is multy faceted and I went off on another tangent.

I don't believe tax cuts would be neccesary if the american people receive enough money to help with the mortgage crisis along with reform on availability to recieve loans

Overseas profits should be highly taxed (or strip them of citizenship) and replace the money the government gives for handouts

How do you propose civilization as a whole learns about living beyond your means? Government assistance for poor decisions?

:doh
 
Take a look at the U6 unemployment statistics, which is more accurate because it includes those who have run out of unemployment benefits, but still don't have a job.

How do you possibly run out of unemployment benefits and still not have a job? Don't they go for like 6 months or something?
 
How do you propose civilization as a whole learns about living beyond your means? Government assistance for poor decisions?

:doh

I agree. Don't buy things you can't afford. That includes a home. If you take a loan out then you better make sure you can pay it off, even in bad times, or face the consequences of taking such a risk.
 
How do you propose civilization as a whole learns about living beyond your means? Government assistance for poor decisions?

:doh

They already govern loan sharking...this is exactly the same except on a broader scale with smaller interests
 
How do you possibly run out of unemployment benefits and still not have a job? Don't they go for like 6 months or something?

A friend of mine couldn't find a job for over half a year. He has a masters in industrial enginerring and has worked in the field for over 20 years. The only thing he could find was a ****ty adjunct teaching job. He's found jobs since then but it took awhile. And this was 3-4 years ago before the current crisis.
 
Ok, so...
Seems to me that if the $x they get from a tax cut doesnt help them, then the $x they get from a government spending program won't hellp them to the same degree.

Given that, why NOT the tax cut, and WHY the spending program?


The US governent doesnt have the power to tax profits for a company that doesnt do buisness here...

The tax cuts are not enough now because the problem snowballed too much before action was taken so a LARGE stimulus is needed for quick fix before collapse

Tax cuts may have helped if implimented six years ago

The government has power to tax the money when they bring it back into this country
 
They already govern loan sharking...this is exactly the same except on a broader scale with smaller interests

Who subsidizes high interest loans??? And by high interest, i am considering the cross reference to loan sharking, where the "vig" exceeds 100% annually.
 
The tax cuts are not enough now because the problem snowballed too much before action was taken so a LARGE stimulus is needed for quick fix before collapse
Tax cuts may have helped if implimented six years ago
You are avoiding the point:

Seems to me that if the $x they get from a tax cut doesnt help them, then the $x they get from a government spending program won't hellp them to the same degree.

If the $x they get from a tax cut will not help, how will the $x they get from government spending?

Understand that $x = $x
 
The government has power to tax the money when they bring it back into this country

Come on now, government is the people. When the people decide to start spending and investing, then the people can be taxed.
 
You are avoiding the point:

Seems to me that if the $x they get from a tax cut doesnt help them, then the $x they get from a government spending program won't hellp them to the same degree.

If the $x they get from a tax cut will not help, how will the $x they get from government spending?

Understand that $x = $x

If you mean a bigger return on their payed in taxes I don't believe that even if most americans recieved %100 percent of their payed taxes back for the year it would be enough...would need a few years worth now

This is why a higher amount stimulus package is needed over taxes
 
I have stated this time and time again. You can not compare unemployment numbers between any EU nation or the US. The US numbers are not "real" numbers but a freaking poll. The real number is estimated at 13 to 14% in the US. The European numbers are far more accurate as they do not exclude large portions of the population after a certain time of being unemployed for one.

Also the European economy is not "one economy" as the US. Sure we want it to be so, but as it stands now it is not. Unemployment in Spain and most Eastern European countries is insane high, where as Holland is at around 2%. The economies are so different that you have to compare countries to countries and to the US.

Look at the private savings. The UK has a very little saving rate, yet the average European saving rate including the UK is 14+%. That means despite the 2% UK saving rate, the average Euro saving rate is 14+%.. meaning someone is saving a buttload.

If we look at each country, there are different stories. Germany the worlds second or third largest exporter (larger than the US btw), is dependant on exports some what, which means if people stop buying, then they will get hurt. But so will China, Japan, and all the other big exporters.

Italy has had next to no growth for 30 years, due to an out dated system and corruption. The only bright spot has been car production and that has even been horrible. That the Italian economy is the worst preformer is no shocker.

Spain, has spent the last decade on steroids thanks to its building boom. Now comes the pay back and due to the lack of flexiblity in the way the Spanish handle their whole system (lots of red tape), then the slow down on top of the building bust and an economy dependant on building and tourism, then that will cause massive problems.

In the UK, you have an "american" problem.. a boom built on massive private debt. Now with the credit crunch, the Brits can finance their own debt with more debt and hence you got a problem there. It also suffered from exploding housing prices and a dramatic fall, and it let consumers remortage the house after the value increased, and now like in the US.. they are in trouble.

France as different problems, but the global slow down will probably hit them less than most but it will still hit them.

Each country has unique issues that are compounded by the global credit crunch started due to toxic US mortgages and lack of regulation in the US. Other than the UK massive personal debt, Europe does not have a "toxic" assets problem of its own, but have bought assets on the global market which we are just like the American's paying a high price (some more than others) for now.
 
A friend of mine couldn't find a job for over half a year. He has a masters in industrial enginerring and has worked in the field for over 20 years. The only thing he could find was a ****ty adjunct teaching job. He's found jobs since then but it took awhile. And this was 3-4 years ago before the current crisis.

I guess. I dunno, I would have taken the ****ty teaching job to hold over until I found the job I wanted. I have this thing (totally personal) about accepting any money from the government. Ever.
 
If you mean a bigger return on their payed in taxes I don't believe that even if most americans recieved %100 percent of their payed taxes back for the year it would be enough...would need a few years worth now

This is why a higher amount stimulus package is needed over taxes
So, why not first cut the taxes and then make up the difference, if there is any, with government spending??
 
Come on now, government is the people. When the people decide to start spending and investing, then the people can be taxed.

I was speeking in terms of compensation for job losses, in turn, tax losses
plus technological advantage losses to help make foreign companies more competative
 
I have stated this time and time again. You can not compare unemployment numbers between any EU nation or the US. The US numbers are not "real" numbers but a freaking poll. The real number is estimated at 13 to 14% in the US.
Anyone else see the irony here?
 
So, why not first cut the taxes and then make up the difference, if there is any, with government spending??

I agree this would be the same but people that were unemployed about a year now would see no benefit from tax cuts
 
I agree this would be the same but people that were unemployed about a year now would see no benefit from tax cuts
So you agree:
Cut taxes first
Spend money second.
 
If we look at each country, there are different stories. Germany the worlds second or third largest exporter (larger than the US btw), is dependant on exports some what, which means if people stop buying, then they will get hurt. But so will China, Japan, and all the other big exporters.

Germany is no.1, China is no.2, and the US is no.3
 
So you agree:
Cut taxes first
Spend money second.

If they both come at the same time sure.

This economy is in no position to see if tax cuts alone will help (kind of like waiting to see if the anti-biotics will work before the infection spreads too far)
 
So, contrary to your previous claim, you were NOT just reporting the news.

Where in the heck do you get that from? I never said I didn't analyze the situation.. It was a first analyzes of the news I read. If you ever read my breaking news posting, you will see than 90% of them also contains a short analyzes.
 
There is no such thing as 100% capitalism.... and, 100% capitalism would dictate that there would be no 'bailouts'.

the bailouts are hyper capitalism. Paying to save the companies, instead of just throwing that money to the people instead to stimulate the economy, which would clearly be judged by Americans as socialism.
 
Where in the heck do you get that from? I never said I didn't analyze the situation..
You, yourself, said you were just reporting the news.
Obviously, that's not true.
 
the bailouts are hyper capitalism. Paying to save the companies, instead of just throwing that money to the people instead to stimulate the economy, which would clearly be judged by Americans as socialism.
Under capitalism, where the market decides what companies live and die, there are -no- bailouts.
Under "Hyper" capitalism, this is even more the case.
 
No, what we need is less socialism; especially corporate socialism. We moved away from the free market quite some time ago, opting for some horrible version of corporate capitalism. We removed much of the mobility. Poor people don't have that much chance of getting rich and the rich have virtually no way of becoming poor. What's needed is true free market capitalism with full class mobility. That way no one can stagnate. Want to remain rich? Well you're gonna have to work at it. While at the same time opening up avenues for the poor to start climbing the economic ladder. I'm not saying bottom 5% to top 1% sort of thing; but give realistic opportunity to at least make it into the middle class. The unfortunate truth is that with our corporate capitalist model and freezing of class structure; those born poor are most likely to die poor. In the meantime people like Paris Hilton will never chance being poor. Should live by the sweat of your brow.

You will probably puke at my solution.. But what I envision to make something like you describe real, is that maximum inheritance should be 500.000$/€ or 10 times GDP(alternatively) per person, per person they inherit from, while the rest is redistributed by the state.

So those people would still get a good start in life which they deserve from having parents who worked to earn as much as they did, but they would have to do something with their life to continue to live well. They would have to work/be productive. Such a solution I think would function really well in Europe, where the money would be redistributed to our social programs, but it could easily also work in the US, and be redistributed in unemployment systems and health care and so on.
 
Back
Top Bottom