We have to get to the bottom of this... - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15224664
Steve_American wrote:My replies are numbered with the numbers I added to your post for clarity.

1] It doesn't matter what the 57% of voters (that you are referring to) vote for, because they are not in Congress and their Reps. & Senators in Congress don't pay any attention to public opinion polls or how those voters vote. The People in Congress vote for the things the top 20% or more so the top 2% want them to vote for.
. . . Bluto, I know that you don't believe this fact, but no taxpayer pays for any thing the Gov. spends to fund. Way back in colonial VA, the colonial Gov. had to issue paper money. It backed it with a new tax. When people paid their taxes with this newly printed money, the VA Gov. burned the paper "Pounds". [It was colonial times so they still used Pounds.] If it needed more money the VA Gov. printed it.
. . . Today, everyone pays their taxes with a check. Almost zero paper dollars are use to pay taxes. The Gov. can't burn the electronic dollars it received. but I have seen claims that it does burn the few paper dollars it gets from Libertarians because an armored truck to move them is more expensive than creating new electronic dollars when the Gov. wants to spend (or printing new paper dollars to replace the burned ones).
. . . When the US Gov. gets a tax payment check it "deposits" it in the Gov. account at the Fed. Just like people or corps would do. However, its account at the Fed is different from all other accounts, because by law the Fed can never bounce a US Gov. check, it must honor and pay the check. Usually, the Treasury has sold bonds to be sure its account has enough to honor all its checks.
. . . Summary. So, no taxpayer pays for what the Gov. buys or gives to people. All spent dollars are created by the act of spending them. All of the spending is done electronically, just like much of your spending is done on your computer making payments. The Gov. spends petty cash with debit cards, not cash, AFAIK.

As for "takers". Do you realize that the corp, Amazon, paid no corp income taxes and got a "refund" anyway.
Clearly Amazon is as much of a taker as you accuse the working poor as being.
. . . The percentage of taxpayers who didn't pay income taxes increased in 2021 because the were unemployed and stimulus checks were not taxable. Maybe unemployment payments were also not taxable.

2] Your conclusion that "Anything else is self-destructive." is not true, because I showed how one of your premises is false. IMO, what is self-destructive is not taxing the rich and corps.

3] People like me are not running the Gov. I know because I would do a lot of things very different. The food shortages in US food stores are not being caused by the Gov. deficit. They are caused by droughts, by covid and supply chain bottlenecks (like meat packing plants being closed because the workers were all sick), by food imports being slowed by worldwide snafus in sea shipping, etc.
. . . As long as there is any food in the food stores they can be looted by riots when the peoples' kids are starving.

4] I know you don't believe this but the vast majority of dollars in the world were created out of thin air either by banks making loans or the US Gov. deficit spending in the past. Of all the dollars in the world the only ones not created in one of these 2 ways were the net of those in the world in 1913 (when the Fed. was created) less the national debt at that time. [These dollars were the hold over from the gold dollars minted by the US Gov. in past times. The current money supply is vastly larger than it was in 1913. My seat of my pants guess of what percentage of the current money supply can be put in that group is less than 1% of the current money supply, and maybe less than 0.1%
. . . Basically, all currencies, all dollars, are created by debts.
. . . Over on the "Credit and Debt" page here on pofo, I have posted to threads about 'How can the US pay off its debt", etc. I have explained that the US can never pay-off the national debt, it will have to roll it over forever. I blame Repud Pres. since 1981 and Reagan for this. They have cut taxes and increased spending like drunken sailors. The debt has gone from $1 T all the way to over $30 T in the 41 years since 1981.
. . . I have explained that all debts are both a liability for someone and an asset for someone else. You just look at the Gov. liability side and ignore the asset side. [Paying-off the US national debt would extinguish all those $30 T of assets.] You also ignore the fact that the world is off the gold standard. The main result of this is the fact the most nations (not those in the EuroZone) can as a result always make every payment that it owes if it is in its own currency. So, because all of the US national debt is owed in US dollars, the US Gov. can always pay the payments on it forever. It doesn't need tax receipts to do it. You may not like this situation, but it is the current situation. I think that you likely want to not be in that situation because you think that it is going someday to be a problem. OK, we can discuss this. However, it s my opinion that all other money systems failed in the past. The US had 6or 7 Bank Panics from 1790 until 1913 and then another in 1929. All these Bank Panics were the same as depressions. The US has had zero depressions since it went off gold in 1971. It has had 3 recessions since 1999. I assert that with modern fiat money the Gov. can do a much better job of regulating the economy to avoid recessions. It doesn't because people like me are not in charge. The people who are in charge still act as if the US was on the gold standard when it comes to regulating the economy and giving to the "takers" who are the working poor, [b] but it is totally willing to give to the takers who are either big banks, big corps, or rich people without needing to "pay for or it". The US Gov. hands out dollars to those 3 groups of takers in massive amounts far in excess of the amounts they in total pay in income taxes. And, you, Bluto, ignore that fact.

.


Ho-Lee-schit. Another fucking book! Can I get a charge number for responses to you?

Any business or corp that gets taxed passes it on to the consumer.

"Their Reps. & Senators in Congress don't pay any attention to public opinion polls or how those voters vote. " Surreal. The entire agenda of the democrat party is to constantly take from one group and give to another. It's the ONLY thing they do. Have you been paying attention? They believe money grows on trees (like you). It's so painful to watch grown people think like this.

The food shortages are the result of too many dollars chasing too few goods and this administration's war on oil/coal/natural gas. Prices get bid up. That goes all the way back to the suppliers of goods. It reverberates thru the economy. First inflation, then rampant inflation and economic stangation and if we're lucky, it turns around. If not, things get worse, depression, rule of law goes out the window, and populations fall by violence (and in a global economy, those that can offshore themselves will with "the poors" left behind).

". . . Basically, all currencies, all dollars, are created by debts. " Yes, yes, Creature of Jeykll Island, fractional currency, how the federal reserve creates $$$ and hands them to the treasury for an IOU back and all that. I know all that.

"I assert that with modern fiat money the Gov. can do a much better job of regulating the economy to avoid recessions." It can regulate, but it's making the problem worse long term when the shit finally does hit the fan. It's like climbing a ladder. Every rung higher means when you finally have to jump, you break a leg, break your legs and hips, break your back or splooot and then they have to pick you up with a stick and a spoon.

You seem to think helicopter money has no consequences. That's foolish. Very foolish. Exceedingly foolish. See Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Weimar Germany and others. You seem to think we can escape the laws of mathematics and economics. I guess gravity doesn't exist in your world. Pure nuttiness.
#15224667
Saeko wrote:Except you said that 57% of households don't pay any income tax, and households generally have at least one person who is employed or living off of retirement money. (There's no other way to eat in this country).

Your flat tax nonsense would only harm the working poor, the old folks, and the severely disabled.


By your definition 90% of the country is working poor, old and severely disabled. You have to keep increasing the share of the population underwater in your mind to keep your ideology going. Wake the hell up! You talk yourself into a self-fulfilling prophecy of poverty.
#15224669
BlutoSays wrote:Poor economic management? They also feel the pain of their poor life decisions. The USA is NOT a rich nation.


Bluto, you are almost the only person who doesn't think that the US is a rich nation.

I'm guessing you mean that the US has a lot of debt that off sets its net income. I base this guess on your comments about the fact that the US has a lot of debt and linked to the "debt clock" that tracked the national debt and other state and local debts.

OTOH, most people, including Repud politicians, just look at the GDP and GDP per capita.

As I said above, your way of looking at the national debt is just wrong. The national debt is both a liability and an asset. When you deduct the national debt from the wealth you are functionally extinguishing about $30 T in assets owned by Americans, American banks, and American corps. Why do you think that this makes sense?
. . . I have explained a few times to you how it is that the national debt will be rolled over forever. That it can only be paid with newly created electronic dollars, because trying to pay it with it off with tax dollars and a surplus, will certainly cause a massive deep depression, which will end the surplus. Paying it off with created dollars is not a good idea. It is better to roll it over forever. There is no other option that I can think of. If you have one share it with us.

The US Gov. is not like a household or corp. Grok that. That analogy is just false. Any professional economists who claims it is true is lying. There can be no other explanation. All economists have to know it is false. So, they must be lying if they say it is true that the US Gov. is lie a household. I know that many people say that it is true. They are either lying or misinformed.

BTW Bluto, did you watch the link that I posted in a thread about what Ray Dalio said about paying off the national debt? If not, then you need to do that.

Bluto, if you disagree with Ray Dalio and me than it is up to you to explain why.

Link to my Dalio thread => viewtopic.php?f=9&t=181981

.
#15224671
BlutoSays wrote:By your definition 90% of the country is working poor, old and severely disabled. You have to keep increasing the share of the population underwater in your mind to keep your ideology going. Wake the hell up! You talk yourself into a self-fulfilling prophecy of poverty.


Lurkers, I can't even reply to Bluto for this one.

I didn't see where Saeko defined "working poor", therefore Bluto should not put words in her mouth and assert that she said that 90% of the people in the US are to be classed as working poor. That figure is silly. At least 20% are doing fine and likely 30 to 40% are doing better than working poor.

.
Last edited by Steve_American on 29 Apr 2022 08:45, edited 2 times in total.
#15224674
BlutoSays wrote:
By your definition 90% of the country is working poor, old and severely disabled. You have to keep increasing the share of the population underwater in your mind to keep your ideology going. Wake the hell up! You talk yourself into a self-fulfilling prophecy of poverty.



You really *do* think that everyone is in parallel lanes throughout life, don't you -- (!) That everyone experiences the same road, which is magically socially provided, along with all other public utilities / services, while government butts-out, downsizes itself, and capitalism keeps all the stars in motion in the heavens.

You're starting to sound like a 'perfect world' type, if it weren't for all those swipes at the Democrats (for all the wrong reasons, though).

Fact check: Has wealth inequality historically been the destruction of entire past civilizations -- ?
#15224676
Steve_American wrote:
The US Gov. is not like a household or corp. Grok that. That analogy is just false.



It's more like a continental tectonic plate, one with just a few others, and all crammed-in onto the surface of the earth. A movement of *any* of them would affect *all* of them, give-or-take.
#15224678
BlutoSays wrote:1] Ho-Lee-schit. Another fucking book! Can I get a charge number for responses to you?

2] Any business or corp that gets taxed passes it on to the consumer.

3] "Their Reps. & Senators in Congress don't pay any attention to public opinion polls or how those voters vote. " Surreal. The entire agenda of the democrat party is to constantly take from one group and give to another. It's the ONLY thing they do. Have you been paying attention? They believe money grows on trees (like you). It's so painful to watch grown people think like this.

4] The food shortages are the result of too many dollars chasing too few goods and this administration's war on oil/coal/natural gas. Prices get bid up. That goes all the way back to the suppliers of goods. It reverberates thru the economy. First inflation, then rampant inflation and economic stangation and if we're lucky, it turns around. If not, things get worse, depression, rule of law goes out the window, and populations fall by violence (and in a global economy, those that can offshore themselves will with "the poors" left behind).

5]". . . Basically, all currencies, all dollars, are created by debts. " Yes, yes, Creature of Jeykll Island, fractional currency, how the federal reserve creates $$$ and hands them to the treasury for an IOU back and all that. I know all that.

6] "I assert that with modern fiat money the Gov. can do a much better job of regulating the economy to avoid recessions." It can regulate, but it's making the problem worse long term when the shit finally does hit the fan. It's like climbing a ladder. Every rung higher means when you finally have to jump, you break a leg, break your legs and hips, break your back or splooot and then they have to pick you up with a stick and a spoon.

You seem to think helicopter money has no consequences. That's foolish. Very foolish. Exceedingly foolish. See Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Weimar Germany and others. You seem to think we can escape the laws of mathematics and economics. I guess gravity doesn't exist in your world. Pure nuttiness.


1] Mark Twain said that lie travels around the world in the time it takes for the victim to put his pants on to reply" Or something like that. By this I mean that it always takes longer to refute a false assertion than it takes to make it in the 1st place. So, I have to write books.

2] This is often not true. Corps should raise their prices to the max. that the market will bear. If the market is competitive, then if the Gov. reduces its giveaways to that corp or raises its taxes, then the corp can't raise its prices without reducing its sales more. This is basic economic theory. Of course, the US market is not competitive, so corps can try to raise prices some. But, who knows if they can raise them enough.
. . . Besides which, the samething can be said about the rich. If the Gov. raises their taxes they can try to have the corps they own pay them more to cover their increased tax bill. But, can they cover it all?

3] There have been studies on this. They have found that what the bottom 80% want or need is rarely delivered in the US. Examples are many. They include just in the last year => Medicare for all, lower drug prices, higher taxes on the rich, forgiving student loan debt, the child care payments, the anti-trust laws enforced, the Union rights laws enforced and strengthened, etc. etc.
. . . The Dems gave the people none of these things. This refutes your claim that the Dems give them what they want so they vote for Dems.

4] How in the world can food shortages be caused by too much money in the economy? Really, this is silly.
. . . You are predicting the future here not describing the last 3 years.

5] You may know all that, but your posts don't seem consistent with that knowledge.

6] Here you are just making an assertion that someday the sh!t will hit the fan. Japan has been deficit spending for over 30 years now and tshtf has not happened yet. A lot of people will die needless deaths in the US over the longer than 30 years that history shows can be necessary before tshtf happens. If it happens.
. . . Your assertion is not proof, it isn't even evidence. I and others have explained how it is just not true that inflation in Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Weimar Germany and other nations was caused by money printing. I'll ay it again, the Koch brother's Cato Institute put out a report that looked for every case of hyperinflation in history that they could find. All 57 of them happened after 1900 and all 57 were caused by shortages before the money printing started. Not after.
. . . Weimar Germany had to pay WWI reparations in gold, Pounds, dollars, or Francs. So, they had a shortage of gold. They set out to buy it by printing Marks. The shortage came 1st. France was also occupying the Ruhr industrial region so there were shortages of products. Also, it was after WWI so there were likely food shortages because Germany lost grain growing regions in Poland, etc.
. . . Shortages cause inflation because the market is doing its job of using price increases to keep the poor from buying what they need before the rich get to buy what they just want.

I don't think that I oe we or the US can escape the "laws of economics". No, I just have asserted and sort of proven that the "laws of economics" that you believe in are not real. I assert that they are claimed to have been proven using deductive logic, not proven by looking at history.
. . . I have asserted that the 1st "Law of deductive logic" is that one can't prove any conclusion if any of the premises that were assumed true are actually false. I have asserted that about 6 of the premises of mainstream economics are obviously false. I have listed examples.
. . . Lurkers, note that Bluto has never replied to refute any of those assertions that I have made in the past. He just ignores them. Just like he ignores my thread about what Ray Dalio said about hard money paying off the national debt.

.
Last edited by Steve_American on 29 Apr 2022 05:21, edited 1 time in total.
#15224681
BlutoSays wrote:By your definition 90% of the country is working poor, old and severely disabled. You have to keep increasing the share of the population underwater in your mind to keep your ideology going. Wake the hell up! You talk yourself into a self-fulfilling prophecy of poverty.


Please explain to me how you arrived at this number.
#15224707
I think we should make the top 1% pay no taxes. I also think we should create an unemployment tax. Meaning, if you don't have a job, you have to pay $1000 every month you don't have a job.
#15224710
Rancid wrote:I think we should make the top 1% pay no taxes. I also think we should create an unemployment tax. Meaning, if you don't have a job, you have to pay $1000 every month you don't have a job.


No, we should just flatten the tax code.
#15224711
BlutoSays wrote:No, we should just flatten the tax code.

When you say flat tax. Is this flat tax on income, or abolish income tax and only have a national sales tax (i.e. fair tax)?

I'm very curious on the concept of not taxing income, and simply taxing consumption. This would actually tax the super rich which buy shit like super yatchs. RIch people generally spend more anyway, so naturally, they would get taxed more. It would also encourage investment and savings.

dunno.
#15224712
Steve_American wrote:1] Mark Twain said that lie travels around the world in the time it takes for the victim to put his pants on to reply" Or something like that. By this I mean that it always takes longer to refute a false assertion than it takes to make it in the 1st place. So, I have to write books.

2] This is often not true. Corps should raise their prices to the max. that the market will bear. If the market is competitive, then if the Gov. reduces its giveaways to that corp or raises its taxes, then the corp can't raise its prices without reducing its sales more. This is basic economic theory. Of course, the US market is not competitive, so corps can try to raise prices some. But, who knows if they can raise them enough.
. . . Besides which, the samething can be said about the rich. If the Gov. raises their taxes they can try to have the corps they own pay them more to cover their increased tax bill. But, can they cover it all?

No, that simply causes black markets & underground economies and in a global economy, it drives business overseas and causes greater unemployment.

3] There have been studies on this. They have found that what the bottom 80% want or need is rarely delivered in the US. Examples are many. They include just in the last year => Medicare for all, lower drug prices, higher taxes on the rich, forgiving student loan debt, the child care payments, the anti-trust laws enforced, the Union rights laws enforced and strengthened, etc. etc.
. . . The Dems gave the people none of these things. This refutes your claim that the Dems give them what they want so they vote for Dems.

You don't "forgive" student debt. Debt doesn't get cancelled ot any of these other euphamisms you have. It gets added to bill of the tax payer, with interest. Once again, you live in a fanstasy world. TANFL

4] How in the world can food shortages be caused by too much money in the economy? Really, this is silly.
. . . You are predicting the future here not describing the last 3 years.

No, YOU are silly.... as are your economic views.

5] You may know all that, but your posts don't seem consistent with that knowledge.

6] Here you are just making an assertion that someday the sh!t will hit the fan. Japan has been deficit spending for over 30 years now and tshtf has not happened yet. A lot of people will die needless deaths in the US over the longer than 30 years that history shows can be necessary before tshtf happens. If it happens.
. . . Your assertion is not proof, it isn't even evidence. I and others have explained how it is just not true that inflation in Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Weimar Germany and other nations was caused by money printing. I'll ay it again, the Koch brother's Cato Institute put out a report that looked for every case of hyperinflation in history that they could find. All 57 of them happened after 1900 and all 57 were caused by shortages before the money printing started. Not after.
. . . Weimar Germany had to pay WWI reparations in gold, Pounds, dollars, or Francs. So, they had a shortage of gold. They set out to buy it by printing Marks. The shortage came 1st. France was also occupying the Ruhr industrial region so there were shortages of products. Also, it was after WWI so there were likely food shortages because Germany lost grain growing regions in Poland, etc.
. . . Shortages cause inflation because the market is doing its job of using price increases to keep the poor from buying what they need before the rich get to buy what they just want.

I don't think that I oe we or the US can escape the "laws of economics". No, I just have asserted and sort of proven that the "laws of economics" that you believe in are not real. I assert that they are claimed to have been proven using deductive logic, not proven by looking at history.
. . . I have asserted that the 1st "Law of deductive logic" is that one can't prove any conclusion if any of the premises that were assumed true are actually false. I have asserted that about 6 of the premises of mainstream economics are obviously false. I have listed examples.
. . . Lurkers, note that Bluto has never replied to refute any of those assertions that I have made in the past. He just ignores them. Just like he ignores my thread about what Ray Dalio said about hard money paying off the national debt.

What's are not real are your economic views. You're part of the Free Shit Army, so you'll say anything to get more free shit. I get that! Do you?

.
#15224713
Rancid wrote:When you say flat tax. Is this flat tax on income, or abolish income tax and only have a national sales tax (i.e. fair tax)?

I'm very curious on the concept of not taxing income, and simply taxing consumption. This would actually tax the super rich which buy shit like super yatchs. RIch people generally spend more anyway, so naturally, they would get taxed more. It would also encourage investment and savings.

dunno.


Flatten the tax on income. Knock out some of the subsidies that have people paying zero taxes on income (or even getting refunds after paying nothing), and restructure the tax brackets to make them flatter, so that a greater percentage of families are paying at least some taxes. Also, kill the moratorium on no payment on student loans. Time for the freeloaders to start paying like everyone else and not benefitting from the services of government whilst paying zero (or getting refunds after paying zero). You have so much of the country paying nothing, that freely issuing debt will come back to haunt us.

I don't think there's a federal tax on yachts - maybe a luxury tax exists? I dunno.

Not a national sales tax.

Many of the super rich will simply reincorporate/relocate overseas if tax burdens get to be too much in this global economy. The ultimate answer is to spend less, but you know we're not going to do that.
#15224716
It's pointless to argue with someone like Bluto. He is incapable of understanding anything that requires two or more steps to understand. Then he just repeats himself ad nauseum.

At some point, you just have to admit that a person is too dumb to take seriously, and this is what we're seeing here.
#15224721
BlutoSays wrote:
Many of the super rich will simply reincorporate/relocate overseas if tax burdens get to be too much in this global economy. The ultimate answer is to spend less, but you know we're not going to do that.



So then what's the *point* of all of that tinkering with the country's tax policy, when the rich are just going to be 'meta-nationalists' anyway, and they'll simply shop-around for whatever country's tax policy is most favorable to them.

You're just winding up describing the *status quo*, with no real intentions of your own -- do you *really* think that the answer is 'to spend less', or are you just throwing more shit at the wall to see what sticks?
#15224723
BlutoSays wrote:<something>

Ah, (aptly named) BS? You might want to get a little practice using the quote function. If you put your comments inside the quote box, anyone responding can't quote you unless they select the text from inside the quote box and paste it into their response, which is generally too much trouble.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 12

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]