Does Yang have the answer to avoiding the imminent recession???

[ttwtt78640]

The more robots we have the more people we need to build the robots and to maintain the robots and to program the robots and to design the robots.

Or we just buy/lease robots from some other country. When they break they are simply replaced and/or sent back to their makers for repairs.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I've misplaced my Socialist Bible somewhere.

It's a simple math (word?) problem - are there more voters who will get Yang cash or corporations which must provide that Yang cash? For extra credit - how many of those corporations get to vote in the DNC primary?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Sometimes voters seem so stupid to the realities of how politics works. You run for president by promising people something that you can't possibly deliver and they fall for it thinking that if you vote for Yang or Bernie or Trump or whoever, that what they ran on will actually come to fruition.

Yep, some even believe it when POTUS candidates say that Mexico will pay for their campaign promises and that lowering federal income tax rates will cover more federal spending and balance the budget, very soon, let them tell you.

 

[PirateMk1]

I figured they may have but I haven't seen one yet...

Home Depot and Lowes has em.

 

[Moderate Right]

Yep, some even believe it when POTUS candidates say that Mexico will pay for their campaign promises and that lowering federal income tax rates will cover more federal spending and balance the budget, very soon, let them tell you.

I think to many on the right, the wall is important to them and they don't give a damn who pays for it. I don't think many really expected Mexico to pay for it. As much as lowering tax rates usually increases the national debt, I find that argument hollow from anyone calling for reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure. The national debt is better off with Republicans.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I think to many on the right, the wall is important to them and they don't give a damn who pays for it. I don't think many really expected Mexico to pay for it. As much as lowering tax rates usually increases the national debt, I find that argument hollow from anyone calling for reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure. The national debt is better off with Republicans.

Keep on kidding yourself.

 

[charliebrown]

I would say we should just beef up the safety net with a decent income and health insurance. As automation comes to replace jobs, the displaced population can enter the safety net system. Currently, we have 62% of the population working, that will slowly but surely go down to roughly 30%.

We really need to go to a sales tax based system instead of an income tax based system. What is the government going to collect when no one is getting income.

PS, Why do we not have Sales tax on stock???? Rich people get all the loop holes.

 

[Moderate Right]

Keep on kidding yourself.

How on Earth can it be better under Democrats when they are talking about reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure?

 

[ttwtt78640]

How on Earth can it be better under Democrats when they are talking about reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure?

Rest assured that talking (campaign "promise" BS) is not what is running up the national debt. Actually increasing federal spending while cutting federal taxation rates is adding $1T/year to the national debt. Annual federal spending is now so much higher than annual federal revenue that even if congress critters managed to cut 100% of non-defense, discretionary spending then we would still have an annual federal deficit.

 

[Moderate Right]

Rest assured that talking (campaign "promise" BS) is not what is running up the national debt. Actually increasing federal spending while cutting federal taxation rates is adding $1T/year to the national debt. Annual federal spending is now so much higher than annual federal revenue that even if congress critters managed to cut 100% of non-defense, discretionary spending then we would still have an annual federal deficit.

So the solution to the problem is voting in a party who clearly state that they want to pay reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure? I applaud Democrats for being honest about it but we are going to hang that around their necks. I'd rather have a party that may up the debt 20 trillion more dollars instead of the other party wanting to up the debt 200 trillion more dollars.

 

[ttwtt78640]

So the solution to the problem is voting in a party who clearly state that they want to pay reparations to slave descendants, wanting Medicare For All, the forgiving of student loan debt, offering free college, and spending 93 trillion dollars on the Green New Deal (saying that is only the beginning) and that doesn't even take into account going further in debt with infrastructure? I applaud Democrats for being honest about it but we are going to hang that around their necks. I'd rather have a party that may up the debt 20 trillion more dollars instead of the other party wanting to up the debt 200 trillion more dollars.

You seem to purposefully ignore the demorats promise to greatly increase federal taxation and the republicants promise to reduce it. Trump is now babbling about a middle class tax cut and/or a payroll tax cut yet, of course, has not mentioned any federal spending cuts.

 

[Moderate Right]

You seem to purposefully ignore the demorats promise to greatly increase federal taxation and the republicants promise to reduce it. Trump is now babbling about a middle class tax cut and/or a payroll tax cut yet, of course, has not mentioned any federal spending cuts.

Not to mention all of the other things I mentioned, where is the 93 trillion dollars for the Green New Deal coming from, and they are saying that that is just the beginning? How many rich people do you tax to come up with 93 trillion dollars? Look, I get it. The Republicans are horrible on the debt and speak with forked tongue. And, you have to admire the Democrats for being honest in saying they want to spend 200 trillion dollars in the next 10 years. But, there isn't 200 trillion dollars in new taxes they can come up with. Now, I know you are going to say that the Green New Deal is a nothingburger and it won't happen anyway, but this is what these people are saying they want to do. I'm not giving them a snowball's chance in hell of doing it, even if I have to vote for the forked tongue party which has brought back trillion dollar deficits.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Not to mention all of the other things I mentioned, where is the 93 trillion dollars for the Green New Deal coming from, and they are saying that that is just the beginning? How many rich people do you tax to come up with 93 trillion dollars? Look, I get it. The Republicans are horrible on the debt and speak with forked tongue. And, you have to admire the Democrats for being honest in saying they want to spend 200 trillion dollars in the next 10 years. But, there isn't 200 trillion dollars in new taxes they can come up with. Now, I know you are going to say that the Green New Deal is a nothingburger and it won't happen anyway, but this is what these people are saying they want to do. I'm not giving them a snowball's chance in hell of doing it, even if I have to vote for the forked tongue party which has brought back trillion dollar deficits.

Nope, better to vote for a different moron who advocates policies that congress would never dare pass than to pretend endless and growing deficits do not matter because Trump.

 

[Obscurity]

Upcoming recession!!!!!!!!!

Top 2 liberal prayers to the flying spaghetti monster:

1) Economic collapse

2) World War III

But yeah, Yang is the only guy who gets what's REALLY happening with the economy in terms of automation and the inevitable necessity of UBI.

UBI is going to become a mandatory thing. At some point, automation will completely eviscerate tons of jobs. In my field, it's been replacing underwriters for decades.

 

[GDViking]

Alaska does it from royalties to oil and gas extraction, not out of general tax revenues.

That is because they are taxing the oil companies and not taxing labor...

 

[Moderate Right]

Nope, better to vote for a different moron who advocates policies that congress would never dare pass than to pretend endless and growing deficits do not matter because Trump.

Doesn't really have anything to do with Trump. Republicans only mean business on the debt when there is a Democratic president. But, Democrats are only reigned in if either the House or the Senate are Republican, or both. No other political combination works. If Democrats get the presidency, the House, and the Senate, then here comes the 200 trillion added to the debt, minus the 50 trillion in increased taxes. They will spend us into oblivion and beyond trying to fight a losing battle against the environment.

 

[GDViking]

You need to understand economics 101. There will always be recessions. It's naive to believe that with trickle up there will never be a recession.

Just because recessions have always been inevitable in the past does not mean they have to be.

Think of it as water travel, we are not the first ones to travel this river so we do not have to explore the narrows, we can pull off and portage...

Will we be slowed down? Of course but because of our previous explorations we can avoid disaster...

 

[GDViking]

There will always be jobs, no matter how much automation comes around. Hell, Henry Ford invented the assembly line. Now we have millions more jobs than we had in his time.

Pepe have lived next to that volcano for a thousand years it will never erupt...

The only thing constant is change...

 

[GDViking]

Wanna buy a bridge? :lamo

It's very telling that you think you own one...:roll:

 

[ttwtt78640]

Doesn't really have anything to do with Trump. Republicans only mean business on the debt when there is a Democratic president. But, Democrats are only reigned in if either the House or the Senate are Republican, or both. No other political combination works. If Democrats get the presidency, the House, and the Senate, then here comes the 200 trillion added to the debt, minus the 50 trillion in increased taxes. They will spend us into oblivion and beyond trying to fight a losing battle against the environment.

The republicants never "mean business" on the debt they believe in telling fairy tales like "starve the beast" and "grow our way out of debt" yet never cut federal spending (expressed in per capita terms) or limit the growth in federal spending to the growth in GDP, much less below that level which would be required to reduce the deficit and/or repay any of the national debt. The republicants do seem to vigorously oppose daring to raise federal taxes to cover current federal spending - but that is simply guaranteeing continued deficit spending.

We have two major parties: the party for a bigger federal government and the party for a huge federal government. Flip a coin.

 

[GDViking]

Home Depot and Lowes has em.

I don't own a lawn mower, I'm promoting regrowth of natural Prairie around my house...

 

[Moderate Right]

Just because recessions have always been inevitable in the past does not mean they have to be.

Think of it as water travel, we are not the first ones to travel this river so we do not have to explore the narrows, we can pull off and portage...

Will we be slowed down? Of course but because of our previous explorations we can avoid disaster...

LOL. There will always be recessions. That's economics 101.

 

[Moderate Right]

Pepe have lived next to that volcano for a thousand years it will never erupt...

The only thing constant is change...

The fact that the population grows insures jobs. There are always jobs to do. People need products and people need services. Now, if the population growth rate starts going negative and stays negative, then we might have a real job problem.

 

[Moderate Right]

The republicants never "mean business" on the debt they believe in telling fairy tales like "starve the beast" and "grow our way out of debt" yet never cut federal spending (expressed in per capita terms) or limit the growth in federal spending to the growth in GDP, much less below that level which would be required to reduce the deficit and/or repay any of the national debt. The republicants do seem to vigorously oppose daring to raise federal taxes to cover current federal spending - but that is simply guaranteeing continued deficit spending.

We have two major parties: the party for a bigger federal government and the party for a huge federal government. Flip a coin.

No one ever cuts federal spending. Whenever they talk about cutting spending they are actually talking about cutting the rate of growth of spending. I hear all of your complaints about Republicans. You're right. But, if we have a Democratic president and a Republican congress, Republicans do get serious about "cutting spending". I'm certainly not going to vote for a party who, when we already owe over 22 trillion dollars, says up front that they want to spend 200 trillion more than we are spending now.

 

[GDViking]

I would say we should just beef up the safety net with a decent income and health insurance. As automation comes to replace jobs, the displaced population can enter the safety net system. Currently, we have 62% of the population working, that will slowly but surely go down to roughly 30%.

We really need to go to a sales tax based system instead of an income tax based system. What is the government going to collect when no one is getting income.

PS, Why do we not have Sales tax on stock???? Rich people get all the loop holes.

Exactly put a sales tax, or transfer tax on the sale of stocks could pay down our debt in a hurry.

The popular consensus right now is that for ever gun transfer there should be the added cost of a minimum of 25.00 dollars for every gun transfered, and for some reason that added cost means nothing to them, but it is a huge cost for hobbyists that buy sell and trade guns...