The National Debt ($35 trillion). The Federal Budget Deficit.

#52
#52
Vol_Doc said:
This myth that there are still millions of Americans waiting on the sidelines to gobble up new jobs is silly. The reality is that there are many who are mostly underemployed, rather than unemployed by choice. So, creating new jobs may help them. What to do with the void that's left, though? You mentioned illegals. We're cracking down on them, as well as reducing legal immigration. Who is going to fill these new, great-paying jobs? Or who will take up the lower-paying jobs that are left open? Can't have it both ways. As much as folks cringe at immigration, and I'm not an open borders guy either, these immigrants perform a lot of jobs Americans can't or won't, and we'll have to rely on them if we intend to grow the work force. There's no new baby boom on the horizon. Our domestic workforce is only going to shrink.
Click to expand...

Here is another pair of truths that will make some on the 'Muricans uncomfortable.

First, we need these immigrants to keep the entitlement Ponzi scheme going, especially if you are a Baby Boomer.

Second, unlike the vast wave of MENA immigrants that are flooding Europe, at least these are mostly Christian, patriarchal, pro-family, hard working immigrants crossing the border that will assimilate into the culture (and hopefully improve it from a pro-family stand point), as opposed to the MENA immigrants that have no intention of assimilating in Europe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#56
#56
marcusluvsvols said:
Great movie. Natalie Portman at like 13, in love with an assassin. Professional. Nice.
Click to expand...

He's a weirdo, but I do love me some Luc Besson. Portman absolutely killed it in that movie, as did Jean Reno and Gary Oldman. The Big Blue was the first Besson movie I ever saw, and that hooked me. Still one of his best.
 
#57
#57
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Here I'll help you out by stitching together my comments. You're okay with corporate tax cuts as long as they're used directly for hiring. I'm making an analogy that what's good for business is going to be good for employment. I previously pointed out that most of the revenue is a result of taxing employment. Healthy businesses that can compete around the world will create and sustain jobs which generate far more tax revenue than taxing corporations. I'm not in favor of slapping taxes on corporations or rich folk to punish them or to redistribute wealth. I'm not a liberal.
Click to expand...

No, I would approve tax cuts that provide for hiring or raising wages of employees below a certain income threshold. The problem we've had for the last 4 or 5 decades is that the wealthy have been keeping a larger and larger slice of the pie. And ultimately, i don't believe it is sustainable. Eventually, the working class will revolt. We always talk about the redistribution of wealth from the perspective of taking from the rich...

How about the rich taking more than their fair share of the wealth? The pie continues to grow, but the workers' slice has gotten no larger. That too is theft only the workers lack the resources and leverage to combat the problem.
 
#58
#58
ClearwaterVol said:
No, I would approve tax cuts that provide for hiring or raising wages of employees below a certain income threshold. The problem we've had for the last 4 or 5 decades is that the wealthy have been keeping a larger and larger slice of the pie. And ultimately, i don't believe it is sustainable. Eventually, the working class will revolt. We always talk about the redistribution of wealth from the perspective of taking from the rich...

How about the rich taking more than their fair share of the wealth? The pie continues to grow, but the workers' slice has gotten no larger. That too is theft only the workers lack the resources and leverage to combat the problem.
Click to expand...

The issue you’re talking about is one created by government.

Your answer seems to be “take more from business owners”.

Mine is “make more business owners”. Limit regulations and taxes so more people can be successful instead of taking from those who are successful
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#59
#59
Vol8188 said:
The issue you’re talking about is one created by government.

Your answer seems to be “take more from business owners”.

Mine is “make more business owners”. Limit regulations and taxes so more people can be successful instead of taking from those who are successful
Click to expand...

No, my answer is take less from business owners that are actually using that money for job creation and raising wages
 
#60
#60
ClearwaterVol said:
No, my answer is take less from business owners that are actually using that money for job creation and raising wages
Click to expand...

It’s not a business owners responsibility to raise your wage, it’s yours. If no one else is willing to give you an extra penny an hour, the problem isn’t with the business. It’s with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#61
#61
ClearwaterVol said:
No, my answer is take less from business owners that are actually using that money for job creation and raising wages
Click to expand...

Also you don’t need to incentivize job creation. Businesses want to make money and if hiring people will help them do that, you don’t have to incentivize it.

But it would be nice if you’d stop decentivizing it
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#62
#62
Vol8188 said:
It’s not a business owners responsibility to raise your wage, it’s yours. If no one else is willing to give you an extra penny an hour, the problem isn’t with the business. It’s with you.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the owners are taking a larger and larger portion of the pie.
 
#63
#63
ClearwaterVol said:
The problem is that the owners are taking a larger and larger portion of the pie.
Click to expand...

Yes, because they have less competition thanks to taxes and regulations. We should be making policies to create more business owners. Not trying to take more from the few who’ve been successful at a game unfairly tilted against them by leftist policies
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#64
#64
Vol8188 said:
Yes, because they have less competition thanks to taxes and regulations. We should be making policies to create more business owners. Not trying to take more from the few who’ve been successful at a game unfairly tilted against them by leftist policies
Click to expand...

That is a bs answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#65
#65
Thunder Good-Oil said:
The Federal government will receive $3.422 trillion in revenue. Most of the taxes are paid by you, either through income or payroll taxes:

Income taxes contribute $1.622 trillion, or 49 percent of total receipts.

Social Security, Medicare, and other payroll taxes add $1.238 trillion, or 36 percent.

Corporate taxes supply $225 billion, or 7 percent.

Excise taxes and tariffs contribute $152 billion, or 4 percent.

Earnings from the Federal Reserve's holdings add $55 billion, or 2 percent. Those are interest payments on the U.S. Treasury debt the Fed acquired through quantitative easing.

Estate taxes and other miscellaneous revenue supply the remaining 2 percent.
Click to expand...

looks like we are spending 4.04 trillion.

I was never an expert on higher maths and never took this new math crap, but everything I have ever learned said 4.04>3.42.

seems like a pretty simple concept to spend less than you make. especially when paying the interest on our loans is one of the top line items on our budget already.

We are spending 363 BILLION on interest. just interest. not actually touching the debt. its fricking disgusting. going back to all our talks on this board about buying houses and what not, most people should be pretty upset by this. but we all shrug and pretend its ok because of the spending we like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#66
#66
ClearwaterVol said:
That is a bs answer.
Click to expand...

Not at all. Competition raises wages and lowers the price of goods. If I have to compete with other businesses, I have to pay more to get the best people and I have to sell my products for less.

But if regulations and taxes limit my competition, I don’t have the same problem and can make a larger profit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#67
#67
Vol8188 said:
It’s not a business owners responsibility to raise your wage, it’s yours. If no one else is willing to give you an extra penny an hour, the problem isn’t with the business. It’s with you.
Click to expand...

What? So what happens if I am a good employee, do my job well, dont call in sick or come in late, work hard yet still dont get a raise. How would that be on me and not my employer?

How is a business suppose to entice workers if they dont give decent wage increases?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#68
#68
BigOrangeTrain said:
What? So what happens if I am a good employee, do my job well, dont call in sick or come in late, work hard yet still dont get a raise. How would that be on me and not my employer?

How is a business suppose to entice workers if they dont give decent wage increases?
Click to expand...

If you’re such a great employee, someone would be willing to give you more, if your skill set is worth it.

If they want, and you’re so great at what you do, go into business for yourself.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#69
#69
IMHO, the debt crisis will eventually be solved in one of three ways. The best and most unlikely scenario is that politicians will regain some semblance of responsibility and start cutting programs. The losers will be the takers who hold about 50% of the votes.

The second and unlikely but possible scenario is the US govt will default on it’s bond obligations. The losers will be the purchasers of US treasuries.

The third and most likely, which is also the worst, is the government will try to print its way out of it while scapegoating retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, Kroger, etc for “ price-gouging”. This will work temporarily for the economically illiterate American public. They will compound this horrible situation by enacting price controls. The losers will be pretty much everyone holding or using US dollars.
 
Last edited:
#70
#70
midnight orange said:
IMHO, the debt crisis will eventually be solved in one of three ways. The best and most unlikely scenario is that politicians will regain some semblance of responsibility and start cutting programs. The losers will be the takers who hold about 50% of the votes.

The second and unlikely but possible scenario is the US govt will default on it’s bond obligations. The losers will be the purchasers of US treasuries.

The third and most likely, which is also the worst, is the government will try to print its way out of it while scapegoating retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, Kroger, etc for “ price-gouging”. This will work temporarily for the economically illiterate American public. They will compound this horrible situation by enacting price controls. The losers will be pretty much everyone holding or using US dollars.
Click to expand...

Option 3 is exactly what we get if Bernie lives to see 2024
 
#71
#71
LouderVol said:
looks like we are spending 4.04 trillion.

I was never an expert on higher maths and never took this new math crap, but everything I have ever learned said 4.04>3.42.

seems like a pretty simple concept to spend less than you make. especially when paying the interest on our loans is one of the top line items on our budget already.

We are spending 363 BILLION on interest. just interest. not actually touching the debt. its fricking disgusting. going back to all our talks on this board about buying houses and what not, most people should be pretty upset by this. but we all shrug and pretend its ok because of the spending we like.
Click to expand...

It's worse than that. The spending is budgeted to exceed the revenues by almost a trillion next fiscal year:

In the fiscal year 2019, the federal budget is $4.407 trillion. The U.S. government estimates it will receive $3.422 trillion in revenue. That creates a $985 billion deficit for October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019.
 
#72
#72
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It's worse than that. The spending is budgeted to exceed the revenues by almost a trillion next fiscal year:

In the fiscal year 2019, the federal budget is $4.407 trillion. The U.S. government estimates it will receive $3.422 trillion in revenue. That creates a $985 billion deficit for October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019.
Click to expand...

Which brings us back to your original post in this thread. Just how much job creation would you need to make up a $1 trillion deficit?
 
#73
#73
Rasputin_Vol said:
Which brings us back to your original post in this thread. Just how much job creation would you need to make up a $1 trillion deficit?
Click to expand...

And without opening the borders, how much more job creation is even possible
 
#74
#74
We have to cut spending to at least stem the growth. We are already near full employment. If we create better jobs then an already employed population will hopefully see significant wage growth. But they’re already paying taxes. They’ll just be paying more taxes. And they’ll be paying more SS and Medicare taxes also and that will help too.

But we have to at least in the near term stem the debt growth and balance the budget.

We need a balanced budget constitutional admendment. There can be extinuinating circumstances clauses but the starting point every year should be net sum zero. Basic freaking accounting.
 
#75
#75
Vol8188 said:
It’s not a business owners responsibility to raise your wage, it’s yours. If no one else is willing to give you an extra penny an hour, the problem isn’t with the business. It’s with you.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying in theory. But in practice, companies are not competing like they did in the past for talent, they are now just working the employees they have and offering more overtime. That covers the more take home for the employee and minimizes the expense of adding more head count. If they work 2 employees 60 hrs a week, they only have to pay benefits for 2 employees. If they hire 3 employees and work each of them 40 hrs, now they have 3 employee benefits to pay.

Also, the dollar you earned last year isn't worth as much as the dollar you earned today due to inflation. There's a guy named John Williams of Shadow Stats that says that if inflation today were calculated the same as it was back in the early 1980s, we would be at 9-10% right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top