The Real Problem

#1
S

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
51,190
Likes
51,258
#1
The real problem with gov't spending and transfers of wealth and our national debt is simply this: we as a society have too many people consuming wealth and too few producing it. Politicians have made matters worse by borrowing against future wealth creation to placate those demanding free benefits.

Currently 58% or less of all Americans are employed (FT&PT). That is roughly 3% more than 1950 when many still operated subsistence farms and half as many women worked outside the home as now. Males were employed at 82% in 1950... now only 74% are employed.

This can NEVER be fixed by more gov't programs and transfers of wealth. Borrowing on the part of the gov't has obscured the problem but done nothing in reality but make it worse. Tax simplification and flattening would be helpful and a net plus for the private economy IMO however increased tax rates would only make the equation worse.

The private economy MUST be expanded with wealth creating jobs... for instance tax accountants do not produce wealth. They may be necessary to retain wealth but they do not produce it.

Bottom line: we can no longer afford or even survive Progressive economic policies that allow people to consume without making a contribution.
 
#3
#3
How do real estate or stock brokers create wealth? Aren't they just providing a service and don't really own or produce anything?
 
#5
#5
sjt18 said:
The real problem with gov't spending and transfers of wealth and our national debt is simply this: we as a society have too many people consuming wealth and too few producing it. Politicians have made matters worse by borrowing against future wealth creation to placate those demanding free benefits.

Currently 58% or less of all Americans are employed (FT&PT). That is roughly 3% more than 1950 when many still operated subsistence farms and half as many women worked outside the home as now. Males were employed at 82% in 1950... now only 74% are employed.

This can NEVER be fixed by more gov't programs and transfers of wealth. Borrowing on the part of the gov't has obscured the problem but done nothing in reality but make it worse. Tax simplification and flattening would be helpful and a net plus for the private economy IMO however increased tax rates would only make the equation worse.

The private economy MUST be expanded with wealth creating jobs... for instance tax accountants do not produce wealth. They may be necessary to retain wealth but they do not produce it.

Bottom line: we can no longer afford or even survive Progressive economic policies that allow people to consume without making a contribution.
Click to expand...

Quite untrue.

We have more than enough productive capacity, and we have more than enough wealth for everybody to live in health and dignity.

We largely agree on consumption, although for completely different reasons, I'm sure.

What we need to do is redefine work, economic rationality, and real wealth.
 
#6
#6
rjd970 said:
How do real estate or stock brokers create wealth? Aren't they just providing a service and don't really own or produce anything?
Click to expand...

I'd say stock brokers create wealth and jobs far more than most professions.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
rjd970 said:
What wealth are they producing?
Click to expand...

They invest their client's money in ipos and bond offerings that directly lead to more capital and therefore jobs to corporations and local, state, andthe federal government. And that doesn't include the jobs created by their services.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
rjd970 said:
How do real estate or stock brokers create wealth? Aren't they just providing a service and don't really own or produce anything?
Click to expand...

They don't however they do provide a service that transfers an generally appreciating resource.
 
#13
#13
How did I know that you would come from left field with something this detached from reality?
utgibbs said:
Quite untrue.

We have more than enough productive capacity, and we have more than enough wealth for everybody to live in health and dignity.
Click to expand...
No... quite true. You have amply demonstrated that you are either a fraud who knows better but is having fun with this or else someone who does not understand wealth creation.

You actually foster a good point here though... about the absolute folly of the ideals that you and the left promote. Yes. You provide for eveyone with existing wealth for a short time. However much like the old USSR... there would be no incentive to expand wealth or even sustain it at current rates. Very quickly wealth generation declines if those producing it do not feel they are getting rewarded... or if they feel others are being rewarded unfairly without producing.

So great. You have once again led us to "truth" about the fallacy of the ideals you espouse.

What we need to do is redefine work, economic rationality, and real wealth.
Click to expand...

Pure idiocy. You cannot redefine objective reality simply because you do not like it.
 
#14
#14
Housing killed it. It was one of the few things that was floating the economy, when it crashed there went a lot of people's golden egg. The big banks should have been left to fall on the sword, a lot of good bailing them out did.

The auto industry priced regular people out of their cars due to paying insane Union labor wages, they did it too themselves. They too should have been left to fall on the sword.

Lowering the corporate tax rate would help some, that's if we had a business friendly government but we don't so forget that.
 
#15
#15
rjd970 said:
How do real estate or stock brokers create wealth? Aren't they just providing a service and don't really own or produce anything?
Click to expand...

Free exchange creates wealth because goods/services are being transferred to those who value them most. Total welfare increases with free exchange.
 
#16
#16
Another little tidbit to blow the minds of liberals... After the Y2K recession and the Bush tax cut, employment went up to over 62%. By 2007 the deficit had shrunk to under $200 billion in spite of the Iraq War spending. IOW's... contrary to the continuous left wing propaganda... tax cut induced economic activity DID get more people to work and off gov't assistance and DID raise revenue receipts. WIN/WIN
 
#17
#17
rjd970 said:
How do real estate or stock brokers create wealth? Aren't they just providing a service and don't really own or produce anything?
Click to expand...

droski said:
I'd say stock brokers create wealth and jobs far more than most professions.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

They aren't producing wealth.

In fact, the latter are simply managers of the mechanisms to concentrate Capital.

These professions are useful to the bourgeoisie. In another economy (and one which must be born quickly) it would be self-evident how miniscule their collective contribution to real wealth generation is.

And having read a few posts on here, it becomes obvious who really understands IPOs and who does not.
 
#18
#18
utgibbs said:
They aren't producing wealth.

In fact, the latter are simply managers of the mechanisms to concentrate Capital.

These professions are useful to the bourgeoisie. In another economy (and one which must be born quickly) it would be self-evident how miniscule their collective contribution to real wealth generation is.

And having read a few posts on here, it becomes obvious who really understands IPOs and who does not.
Click to expand...

Yes they are. Any service people willfully pay for (that isn't required by law) increases wealth. If it didn't make your life more convenient or increase your standard of living in some way, there's no reason for you to employ them. You employ them because they are able to create value for you.
 
#19
#19
sjt18 said:
Another little tidbit to blow the minds of liberals... After the Y2K recession and the Bush tax cut, employment went up to over 62%. By 2007 the deficit had shrunk to under $200 billion in spite of the Iraq War spending. IOW's... contrary to the continuous left wing propaganda... tax cut induced economic activity DID get more people to work and off gov't assistance and DID raise revenue receipts. WIN/WIN
Click to expand...

The Iraq war wasn't a budget item so it wouldn't have been figured into Bush's budget deficits.
 
#20
#20
lumberjack4 said:
The Iraq war wasn't a budget item so it wouldn't have been figured into Bush's budget deficits.
Click to expand...

You could be right but the graphic didn't indicate that. However even if true, the deficit that year was on the order of $300 billion.... a FAR cry from what Obama has accomplished in his two years.
 
#21
#21
nbakerld said:
Yes they are. Any service people willfully pay for (that isn't required by law) increases wealth. If it didn't make your life more convenient or increase your standard of living in some way, there's no reason for you to employ them. You employ them because they are able to create value for you.
Click to expand...

No they are not.

In fact, the state of the world outside the Communist nations (China and Cuba) demonstrates this fact beyond doubt. Without Communist China, world poverty as a whole has increased, a substantial portion of which live at or below Medieval standards. And that's no Heritage Foundation analysis of poverty, that's the real world outside the back door. The professions in question simply concentrate what wealth there is into fewer hands.

You, volinbham, and I could probably have a great go around on what people willingly pay for. Much of it diminishes wealth in the extreme.
 
#22
#22
Repeating shat you made up and posted over and over doesn't change the fantasy island nature of the message.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#23
#23
BigPapaVol said:
Repeating shat you made up and posted over and over doesn't change the fantasy island nature of the message.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

And as usual what you think is merde is actually the real world outside the back door.

heh heh. merde and back door. The audience is here that will appreciate it.
 
#24
#24
foden20110718bmitaxes.jpg


Seriously though, here is some food for thought.

Jeremy Rifkin: End of Work

obamasolvesdebtcrisis.jpg
 
#25
#25
utgibbs said:
No they are not.

In fact, the state of the world outside the Communist nations (China and Cuba) demonstrates this fact beyond doubt. Without Communist China, world poverty as a whole has increased, a substantial portion of which live at or below Medieval standards. And that's no Heritage Foundation analysis of poverty, that's the real world outside the back door. The professions in question simply concentrate what wealth there is into fewer hands.

You, volinbham, and I could probably have a great go around on what people willingly pay for. Much of it diminishes wealth in the extreme.
Click to expand...

If this is your explanation as to why exchange does not create wealth then you and I are talking about two completely different things.

Exchange Creates Wealth:
You and I both have crap we don't need/want. I have a laptop, so I don't have much use for my desktop, but I don't own a TV. You have 3 TV's and no computer. We freely exchange. Now you have a computer and I have a TV. We are both wealthier from our exchange even though we didn't "produce" anything. Free exchange creates wealth.

A lot of service jobs (and advertising) exist only to facilitate exchange. This is possible (and necessary) because exchange is so valuable in creating wealth for an economy.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top