(03-23-2020 09:24 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Your response shows a basic ignorance of finance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a corporation that has issued stock buying back some or even all of it when the price goes down. Buy low, sell high is a basic Economics 101 rule of all of societal interactions when it comes to trade, and without that you quickly lose the ability for anyone to do anything much but being hunter-gatherers, which we clearly are not (I imagine you are not as well, as you likely live in some fixed or semi-fixed location, correct? Or do you have a tent you move around from place to place following your main food source of choice and its heard(s?)

When a corporation issues stock, it is borrowing money, taking on debt from folks or other institutions, who become shareholders and that corporation has an obligation to consider buying back its own stock should the price go below either what it issued at or below a long-term level of support that it has historically traded at, thus reducing the cost of debt for that company over the longer term, which means the corporation is stronger and less likely to fail. responsible for the corporation, and responsible for its shareholders, and ultimately, making the American economy stronger.

Why would any rational person be against that unless they wanted to reduce society back to hunter-gatherers and warring tribes and factions (as they have, more or less, in say, Afghanistan, and other more backward third-world places? If that is in fact what you wish, then I suggest you move yourself over there, doff your coat and tie (or, more likely your t-shirt) and don a tribal tunic or robe, grab your spear (if you even know how to use one) subjugate yourself to your local chief who may or may not treat you and any of those you might care about with any rights, dignity or respect at all, and you can see just how inferior that way of life is to the successful corporate and capitalistic culture and society we have built for several hundred years that, while not perfect, allows for the greatest scientific, knowledge and human advancement for mankind of any other societal model in human history.

The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination. If you don't like your lot in life here in free America, get off your butt, quit your job, and go out on your own, raise some capital if you don't have it and start your own business. All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner, taking risks and without any guarantee of return or payment or paycheck, with the responsibility and reliance to pay workers and for resources and raw materials to the extent you need them, you will quickly figure out that profit is a very, very good thing, and that overpaying for workers and materials you need is a sure way to starve yourself to death for all your hard work and risk. Our system may not be perfect, but it's the best dang system on the planet by far, and you would do well to be grateful for those who sacrificed and risked so you could even have the right to complain with the ignorance as you do.

So you think it's fair to criticize the average american who doesn't have a several month nest egg but not the industries saying they need billions right now? If stock buybacks make you less likely to fail in the long term why exactly are these companies who engaged in this practice after the Tax Cuts the ones crying poor the hardest?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlin...2020-03-18

did you consider w/0 such, or the "nest egg" are entirely different in equitable or entity???

one requires discipline in saving...the other is necessary in a capitalistic system...

#makeYourBed

(03-23-2020 09:47 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 09:24 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Your response shows a basic ignorance of finance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a corporation that has issued stock buying back some or even all of it when the price goes down. Buy low, sell high is a basic Economics 101 rule of all of societal interactions when it comes to trade, and without that you quickly lose the ability for anyone to do anything much but being hunter-gatherers, which we clearly are not (I imagine you are not as well, as you likely live in some fixed or semi-fixed location, correct? Or do you have a tent you move around from place to place following your main food source of choice and its heard(s?)

When a corporation issues stock, it is borrowing money, taking on debt from folks or other institutions, who become shareholders and that corporation has an obligation to consider buying back its own stock should the price go below either what it issued at or below a long-term level of support that it has historically traded at, thus reducing the cost of debt for that company over the longer term, which means the corporation is stronger and less likely to fail. responsible for the corporation, and responsible for its shareholders, and ultimately, making the American economy stronger.

Why would any rational person be against that unless they wanted to reduce society back to hunter-gatherers and warring tribes and factions (as they have, more or less, in say, Afghanistan, and other more backward third-world places? If that is in fact what you wish, then I suggest you move yourself over there, doff your coat and tie (or, more likely your t-shirt) and don a tribal tunic or robe, grab your spear (if you even know how to use one) subjugate yourself to your local chief who may or may not treat you and any of those you might care about with any rights, dignity or respect at all, and you can see just how inferior that way of life is to the successful corporate and capitalistic culture and society we have built for several hundred years that, while not perfect, allows for the greatest scientific, knowledge and human advancement for mankind of any other societal model in human history.

The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination. If you don't like your lot in life here in free America, get off your butt, quit your job, and go out on your own, raise some capital if you don't have it and start your own business. All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner, taking risks and without any guarantee of return or payment or paycheck, with the responsibility and reliance to pay workers and for resources and raw materials to the extent you need them, you will quickly figure out that profit is a very, very good thing, and that overpaying for workers and materials you need is a sure way to starve yourself to death for all your hard work and risk. Our system may not be perfect, but it's the best dang system on the planet by far, and you would do well to be grateful for those who sacrificed and risked so you could even have the right to complain with the ignorance as you do.

So you think it's fair to criticize the average american who doesn't have a several month nest egg but not the industries saying they need billions right now? If stock buybacks make you less likely to fail in the long term why exactly are these companies who engaged in this practice after the Tax Cuts the ones crying poor the hardest?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlin...2020-03-18

did you consider w/0 such, or the "nest egg" are entirely different in equitable or entity???

one requires discipline in saving...the other is necessary in a capitalistic system...

#makeYourBed

Then it might be "necessary" to just let capitalism run it's course and if these companies fail they fail. Certainly you can just let Cruise Lines fail those are not necessary industries.

(03-23-2020 09:24 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Your response shows a basic ignorance of finance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a corporation that has issued stock buying back some or even all of it when the price goes down. Buy low, sell high is a basic Economics 101 rule of all of societal interactions when it comes to trade, and without that you quickly lose the ability for anyone to do anything much but being hunter-gatherers, which we clearly are not (I imagine you are not as well, as you likely live in some fixed or semi-fixed location, correct? Or do you have a tent you move around from place to place following your main food source of choice and its heard(s?)

When a corporation issues stock, it is borrowing money, taking on debt from folks or other institutions, who become shareholders and that corporation has an obligation to consider buying back its own stock should the price go below either what it issued at or below a long-term level of support that it has historically traded at, thus reducing the cost of debt for that company over the longer term, which means the corporation is stronger and less likely to fail. responsible for the corporation, and responsible for its shareholders, and ultimately, making the American economy stronger.

Why would any rational person be against that unless they wanted to reduce society back to hunter-gatherers and warring tribes and factions (as they have, more or less, in say, Afghanistan, and other more backward third-world places? If that is in fact what you wish, then I suggest you move yourself over there, doff your coat and tie (or, more likely your t-shirt) and don a tribal tunic or robe, grab your spear (if you even know how to use one) subjugate yourself to your local chief who may or may not treat you and any of those you might care about with any rights, dignity or respect at all, and you can see just how inferior that way of life is to the successful corporate and capitalistic culture and society we have built for several hundred years that, while not perfect, allows for the greatest scientific, knowledge and human advancement for mankind of any other societal model in human history.

The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination. If you don't like your lot in life here in free America, get off your butt, quit your job, and go out on your own, raise some capital if you don't have it and start your own business. All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner, taking risks and without any guarantee of return or payment or paycheck, with the responsibility and reliance to pay workers and for resources and raw materials to the extent you need them, you will quickly figure out that profit is a very, very good thing, and that overpaying for workers and materials you need is a sure way to starve yourself to death for all your hard work and risk. Our system may not be perfect, but it's the best dang system on the planet by far, and you would do well to be grateful for those who sacrificed and risked so you could even have the right to complain with the ignorance as you do.

So you think it's fair to criticize the average american who doesn't have a several month nest egg but not the industries saying they need billions right now? If stock buybacks make you less likely to fail in the long term why exactly are these companies who engaged in this practice after the Tax Cuts the ones crying poor the hardest?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlin...2020-03-18

I disagreed with the bailouts of AIG and such during the last Democrat-created debacle, The RTC (Resolution trust Corporation--look it up) and the non-punishment of those responsible--but Barney Frank never did time for what he put our country through, along with some high execs who should have been held accountable for the way they irresponsibly manipulated the markets, though the fact they were ordered to by the Democrats irrational insistences gave them some cover.

As to Americans crying poor when they were spending on latest i-phones and cable TV and crap they didn't need, when they could have been more prudent, well, this is a lesson in personal finance all would do well to learn, since they don't teach this in school anymore and too many from broken families or never were families show the insanity of destroying the nuclear family two-parent model.

Many people have no idea how to handle a crisis and hunker down--never learned the real value of money and the difference between wants and needs. Now, maybe some will be forced to learn, and that is a GOOD thing for all, painful as it can be. The truth is, housing prices are overinflated by 30+ million illegals who should not be here and too many have been willing to over-borrow and overpay. Credit cards debt is for fools, but too many live on cards instead of cash. Don;t complain about corporate debt when you likely are over-charged on your own credit. Difference is your credit and what you chose to buy with it has little to no value and now you'll be finding that out the hard way. You don't need those cards you've been told you do--it's a complete lie, and you don't have to be rich at all to live sensibly. So you can't easily and quickly buy online? That's a GOOD thing--those who have no debt (and not even necessarily have a lot of money, just no debt) understand this principle, and it is free for all to use, but most choose not to--that's on them.

Too many drugs people don't need and too much waste in society. Since they've been trained "insurance will pay" (another lie the Dems want you to believe) they buy and use what they really don;t need because some doctor or TV commercial told them to--how dumb is that? I feel sorry not one iota for stupidity on that level. Free to do so, but don't complain when the inevitable downturns come. Too many people also panicking when they forgot to build up a community of caring brothers and sisters--some type of faith community is necessary to get through tough times. Doesn't have to be specific, but those communities do seem to weather storms better and build more than say the local coven of witches do--never saw a witches for lepers colony, but I do know of several organized religious ones that can tackle a crisis without fear and with the resilience necessary to win in the long haul.

Some things to consider. Try to live like you were a pioneer, or early American and you'll see all the bloat and crap you don't need--and you'll be grateful for the freedom of capitalism and corporations that you've been lied to and trained to hate by the ignorant. Turn in your smartphone and get a basic flip for just talk and text--save $1,000 or more right there, kimosabe, so go buy some strore-brand groceries with your windfall. Cut that cable cord if you still have it, drop your bloated nearly useless health policy and self-insure--you'll save tens of thousands, and learn how much you really can care for yourself. Take the red pill rather than the free blue ones that have been force-fed to you with their lies and learn the truth this time. What you have been living is a lie. Start a company, start a business, be a free citizen, and participate in building rather than just taking a paycheck and complaining others don't do enough for you when you are the source of the most waste in your own life. Now's a great time to start a new business- I'm starting another one this week, but if you can't see that, then you really don't understand what freedom and America is all about. These are great times right now, and I applaud those who are in position to both recognize and do well for themselves from it. God Bless America!

(03-23-2020 07:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  We are vulnerable in so many ways because we do not as a society plan for crises and emergencies.

Amusingly, Trump created an 'emergency response fund' within the CDC budget that is now 100mm. Not remotely enough to handle all of the issues, but this was merely for the CDC... and yet all we hear is about how he gutted them?

This is also why I am focusing on a cultural change towards taking 'virus transmission' a more significant part of our daily lives.Whether it's annual flu which has killed millions cumulatively, or the latest Corona, which seems to come around about every 5-10 years... or whatever is NEXT... Good flu hygiene (beyond just caring for yourself) needs to happen.

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Your response shows a basic ignorance of finance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a corporation that has issued stock buying back some or even all of it when the price goes down. Buy low, sell high is a basic Economics 101 rule of all of societal interactions when it comes to trade, and without that you quickly lose the ability for anyone to do anything much but being hunter-gatherers, which we clearly are not (I imagine you are not as well, as you likely live in some fixed or semi-fixed location, correct? Or do you have a tent you move around from place to place following your main food source of choice and its heard(s?)

That's all fine and good when it's being used as intended, but when it's being used to turn the stock market into a cryptocurrency-style pump-and-dump it's a problem. The stock market nearly tripled in value in the last 10 years. That's a bubble, not "buy low sell high."

Quote:When a corporation issues stock, it is borrowing money, taking on debt from folks or other institutions, who become shareholders and that corporation has an obligation to consider buying back its own stock should the price go below either what it issued at or below a long-term level of support that it has historically traded at, thus reducing the cost of debt for that company over the longer term, which means the corporation is stronger and less likely to fail. responsible for the corporation, and responsible for its shareholders, and ultimately, making the American economy stronger.

There's more to an economy than corporate profits and shareholder dividends. If it's not working for those on the bottom you'll find they end up having to scrounge to get by, which is how you end up with Americans living check to check. For most of America the "economy" is what's in their fridge and checking account more than what's in their portfolio.

Quote:The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination. If you don't like your lot in life here in free America, get off your butt, quit your job, and go out on your own, raise some capital if you don't have it and start your own business.

"i mean if you don't like your job just find money lol"

Quote:All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner,

This explains everything. They're not letting you into their club, dude. You can stop with this any time you like.

Quote:taking risks and without any guarantee of return or payment or paycheck, with the responsibility and reliance to pay workers and for resources and raw materials to the extent you need them, you will quickly figure out that profit is a very, very good thing, and that overpaying for workers and materials you need is a sure way to starve yourself to death for all your hard work and risk. Our system may not be perfect, but it's the best dang system on the planet by far, and you would do well to be grateful for those who sacrificed and risked so you could even have the right to complain with the ignorance as you do.

You do understand that this mindset is why we're running so short on medical supplies right now, right? "If I pay my workers too much, that would be terrible for business, so I'd better outsource everything to a hostile foreign power that treats their workers like expendable cattle." If you want to see a light being shone on something, it's this mindset and what it's done to our country. If we go back to doing things your way, we'll be setting ourselves up for failure again.

We need to get money exchanging hands again. Once that happens, we can turn a corner. That is the only economic metric that matters.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination.

This is the problem that I see with the left. " Oh, Bernie will just tax the "rich" to pay for it." What if 1) the "rich" don't want to be taxed to pay for it, and 2) they are the most portable people (along with corporations) so they have viable options not to be taxed to pay for it?

Whenever one of my leftist friends starts talking about "taxing the rich," my question is always, "How do you expect them to respond?" They don't like that question, because they don't have an answer.

(03-23-2020 10:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination.

This is the problem that I see with the left. " Oh, Bernie will just tax the "rich" to pay for it." What if 1) the "rich" don't want to be taxed to pay for it, and 2) they are the most portable people (along with corporations) so they have viable options not to be taxed to pay for it?

Whenever one of my leftist friends starts talking about "taxing the rich," my question is always, "How do you expect them to respond?" They don't like that question, because they don't have an answer.

There needs to be an honest discussion on both sides. The rich aren't going to just willingly pay more in taxes, but cutting their taxes also doesn't get that money trickling down to the average american.

(03-23-2020 10:34 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 10:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination.

This is the problem that I see with the left. " Oh, Bernie will just tax the "rich" to pay for it." What if 1) the "rich" don't want to be taxed to pay for it, and 2) they are the most portable people (along with corporations) so they have viable options not to be taxed to pay for it?
Whenever one of my leftist friends starts talking about "taxing the rich," my question is always, "How do you expect them to respond?" They don't like that question, because they don't have an answer.

There needs to be an honest discussion on both sides. The rich aren't going to just willingly pay more in taxes, but cutting their taxes also doesn't get that money trickling down to the average american.

Why don't we go back to what Art Laffer actually wrote/said, for starters? There are two tax rates that produce zero tax revenue--0% for obvious reasons, and 100% because nobody would work to generate taxable income at that rate. At some point in between the two, there is some tax rate that maximizes revenue. Below that rate, any increase in tax rates drives an overall increase in revenues. Above that rate, people getting out of taxable income producing activities decreases revenues. At some point lower than the maximum revenue point, there is a rate that maximizes economic growth. You need some taxes to grow, because you need to pay for national defense and public safety and basic infrastructure and a legal structure, in order for economic activity to take place safely. The "sweet spot" is probably somewhere between those two rates, depending on whether as a matter of policy you put government revenues or economic growth higher in importance.

In that construct, how do we determine the optimum tax rate? I would say look at what other countries are doing to attract investment and growth and ultimately wealth. As long as our rates are higher than theirs, the incentive is move offshore. If our rates are lower than theirs, the incentive is to move or stay here. That's not the only incentive, but it is one, and often a strong one. So I would say the rest of the world pretty much defines the Laffer optimum rate. The problem is that every one of those other countries are getting tax revenues from national consumption taxes, which allow them to get by with lower income tax rates. We could actually have the lowest consumption tax rate, the lowest corporate tax rate, and the lowest individual tax rates in the world, and stlll balance our budget--with UBI and Bismarck.

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  That's all fine and good when it's being used as intended, but when it's being used to turn the stock market into a cryptocurrency-style pump-and-dump it's a problem. The stock market nearly tripled in value in the last 10 years. That's a bubble, not "buy low sell high."

It is not others' responsibility to prevent you from being stupid, though we can try to encourage you no to. Recognizing how different folks use the markets is part of it. Ever hear of hedging? yeah, thought not. there are ALWAYS opportunities in the market, up or down or sideways, but you do have to be able to do more than just add 1+1. Sorry, it takes effort and patience. No effort and no patience = no reward for you. That's more than fair.

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  There's more to an economy than corporate profits and shareholder dividends. If it's not working for those on the bottom you'll find they end up having to scrounge to get by, which is how you end up with Americans living check to check. For most of America the "economy" is what's in their fridge and checking account more than what's in their portfolio.

What you wrote here is simply NOT true--but you've been conditioned, likely form the leftist "schools" you attended to believe those lies. first of all, most everyone will have both good times and bad--it is an adult responsibility, not the gub-mint's to recognize that. Hedging tough times can be dome in many ways--faith communities that you participate in, contributing to and with in good times for you (may be bad times for others you can help) and vice-versa is a GREAT hedge that too many ignore to their own detriment--that's on them for their free choice. And since when is "having to scrounge to get by" a bad thing? Scrounging through tough times teaches you value and what wants and needs are and how to distinguish. Sad if you haven't experienced this before, but those of us who did and learned have a resilience to know how to be resourceful and get through. Sheltering people from having to work through tough times and failure is a stupid long-term strategy, and harmful to those you purport to feel sorry for. Why non earth would you want to hurt people by preventing them from learning? 'When the going gets tough the tough find a way to get going' used to be a common expression, now it's 'when the going gets tough give me mo' money, gub'mint.' That's not very practical over the long term, is it? As to having to live with little to no savings, I've done that over long-term and learned how to be comfortable without a safety net. It's freeing in a way that can't be described without having been through the fire. Those are the strong in times when they are weak. I wouldn't take that opportunity away from anyone I cared about, even if you would.

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  "i mean if you don't like your job just find money lol"

You can laugh all you want, but it only shows and proves your own ignorance. Truth is, no, you don't need any of your own money to get yourself going, but if you want to believe that lie than you deserve your lot in life. I'm starting another new business this very week without a dime of my own, nor a bank nor a loan, nor any government involvement. Have done it before and that model works. Had to learn it myself through years of perseverance. better man for it. patience and fortitude, qualities I see you lack, my friend. How do you get the money, you ask? Only going through the tough times yourself teaches you the resourcefulness to do something others consider impossible. So, yes, there are multiple ways to do so, and they all start with getting your head out of your a$$ and sitting up and paying attention.

Quote:All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner,

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  This explains everything. They're not letting you into their club, dude. You can stop with this any time you like.

Wow. I feel so sorry for you, my friend. It's not about being in any club, what an obtuse response you have, there pal. You start all ideas with what you can't do and where you think you do not belong, then project it to all, and you train yourself and associate only with those who believe in and reinforce that lie. How truly sad for you.




Yeah, I know. The Dumbocrats and "progressive" left just spent buillions and an entire trilogy hatefully destroying that character. Why? because Leftists hate truth. They appear to scream because they don;t want to believe. Always with the Leftist it cannot be done. No matter. Truth is truth, whether you yourself choose to believe it or not does not make it any less so. Only pity you, but that is your free will choice, so go ahead and deny if you wish. Others choose to accept and work in reality, and that is why they succeed. Your jealousy only hurts you and those who think like you in the end.

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  You do understand that this mindset is why we're running so short on medical supplies right now, right? "If I pay my workers too much, that would be terrible for business, so I'd better outsource everything to a hostile foreign power that treats their workers like expendable cattle." If you want to see a light being shone on something, it's this mindset and what it's done to our country. If we go back to doing things your way, we'll be setting ourselves up for failure again.

We're running short on some supplies because we have far too many people institutionalized and trained to overuse a system most (not all) do not need to be using in they wasteful an unnecessary ways they do. The current situation is doing an excellent, and necessary, job in pointing this flaw out. Who is responsible? Well, for one his name began with an "O" and he told you a lie that you could have your cake and eat it, too and it would cost you less and give you everything and more and you were stupid enough to believe him and his cronies. So don't blame others who said "I told you so that this wouldn't work, because it doesn't, and you're mad for just now finding that out. Okay, admit the truth and let's start figuring this out.

As to basic business sense, it's clear you are too close-minded at the moment to accept basic economics, supply and demand, profit and loss. So sorry, but that is probably caused by the ignorance of your school and lack of real-world experience. But rejoice! You will now get to see and learn some of that for real, so kudos for you! You will have to open your eyes, though. Can't drive too well without being willing to see. As for outsourcing to hostile foreign powers, yada, yada, yada, hey Why are you shooting the messenger? Did not Pres Trump campaign on and promote "America First" and un-globalizing our economy while the Dems were shouting bloody murder and hatred at him? Can you admit the gloabalization of everything, especially our vital interests in times of need was an utterly stupid idea in the first place? But is that not the Dems way? So why are you turning about so quickly here? Truth is if we get about doing things closer to the ways I've espoused above, we'll be better off and so will you. That reality hurts, but here's something that could help you ease the pain:

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Your response shows a basic ignorance of finance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a corporation that has issued stock buying back some or even all of it when the price goes down. Buy low, sell high is a basic Economics 101 rule of all of societal interactions when it comes to trade, and without that you quickly lose the ability for anyone to do anything much but being hunter-gatherers, which we clearly are not (I imagine you are not as well, as you likely live in some fixed or semi-fixed location, correct? Or do you have a tent you move around from place to place following your main food source of choice and its heard(s?)

When a corporation issues stock, it is borrowing money, taking on debt from folks or other institutions, who become shareholders and that corporation has an obligation to consider buying back its own stock should the price go below either what it issued at or below a long-term level of support that it has historically traded at, thus reducing the cost of debt for that company over the longer term, which means the corporation is stronger and less likely to fail. responsible for the corporation, and responsible for its shareholders, and ultimately, making the American economy stronger.

Why would any rational person be against that unless they wanted to reduce society back to hunter-gatherers and warring tribes and factions (as they have, more or less, in say, Afghanistan, and other more backward third-world places? If that is in fact what you wish, then I suggest you move yourself over there, doff your coat and tie (or, more likely your t-shirt) and don a tribal tunic or robe, grab your spear (if you even know how to use one) subjugate yourself to your local chief who may or may not treat you and any of those you might care about with any rights, dignity or respect at all, and you can see just how inferior that way of life is to the successful corporate and capitalistic culture and society we have built for several hundred years that, while not perfect, allows for the greatest scientific, knowledge and human advancement for mankind of any other societal model in human history.

The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination. If you don't like your lot in life here in free America, get off your butt, quit your job, and go out on your own, raise some capital if you don't have it and start your own business. All of which you are fully free to do any time you wish here in America, unlike in much of the world. As a business owner, taking risks and without any guarantee of return or payment or paycheck, with the responsibility and reliance to pay workers and for resources and raw materials to the extent you need them, you will quickly figure out that profit is a very, very good thing, and that overpaying for workers and materials you need is a sure way to starve yourself to death for all your hard work and risk. Our system may not be perfect, but it's the best dang system on the planet by far, and you would do well to be grateful for those who sacrificed and risked so you could even have the right to complain with the ignorance as you do.

That's impossible, it would require personal responsibility, and to the "GIMME GIMME GIMME" class self-responsibility is verboten.

Better to have the government commit armed robbery writ large of those who actually have self-responsibility and just hand you the fruits of someone else's labors.

(03-23-2020 10:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 10:34 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 10:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination.

This is the problem that I see with the left. " Oh, Bernie will just tax the "rich" to pay for it." What if 1) the "rich" don't want to be taxed to pay for it, and 2) they are the most portable people (along with corporations) so they have viable options not to be taxed to pay for it?
Whenever one of my leftist friends starts talking about "taxing the rich," my question is always, "How do you expect them to respond?" They don't like that question, because they don't have an answer.

There needs to be an honest discussion on both sides. The rich aren't going to just willingly pay more in taxes, but cutting their taxes also doesn't get that money trickling down to the average american.

Why don't we go back to what Art Laffer actually wrote/said, for starters? There are two tax rates that produce zero tax revenue--0% for obvious reasons, and 100% because nobody would work to generate taxable income at that rate. At some point in between the two, there is some tax rate that maximizes revenue. Below that rate, any increase in tax rates drives an overall increase in revenues. Above that rate, people getting out of taxable income producing activities decreases revenues. At some point lower than the maximum revenue point, there is a rate that maximizes economic growth. You need some taxes to grow, because you need to pay for national defense and public safety and basic infrastructure and a legal structure, in order for economic activity to take place safely. The "sweet spot" is probably somewhere between those two rates, depending on whether as a matter of policy you put government revenues or economic growth higher in importance.

In that construct, how do we determine the optimum tax rate? I would say look at what other countries are doing to attract investment and growth and ultimately wealth. As long as our rates are higher than theirs, the incentive is move offshore. If our rates are lower than theirs, the incentive is to move or stay here. So I would say the rest of the world pretty much defines the Laffer optimum rate. The problem is that every one of those other countries are getting tax revenues from national consumption taxes, which allow them to get by with lower income tax rates. We could actually have the lowest consumption tax rate, the lowest corporate tax rate, and the lowest individual tax rates in the world, and stlll balance our budget--with UBI and Bismarck.

(03-23-2020 10:34 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 10:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 08:52 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The corporate hatred mantras you repeat without thinking and perhaps have been indoctrinated into you from the ignorant in public schools and such break down real fast when put under the light of clear and lucid examination.

This is the problem that I see with the left. " Oh, Bernie will just tax the "rich" to pay for it." What if 1) the "rich" don't want to be taxed to pay for it, and 2) they are the most portable people (along with corporations) so they have viable options not to be taxed to pay for it?

Whenever one of my leftist friends starts talking about "taxing the rich," my question is always, "How do you expect them to respond?" They don't like that question, because they don't have an answer.

There needs to be an honest discussion on both sides. The rich aren't going to just willingly pay more in taxes, but cutting their taxes also doesn't get that money trickling down to the average american.

I'll agree with the direction of this discussion. first, why should "the rich" have to pay unless they want to? If we took you and made you one of the uber-rich, or even moderately rich, you'd almost certainly feel and behave the very same way, and you'd be justified for doing so.

Also agree that merely cutting their taxes is not the full answer, but it can be a part of it if done properly. What I do not see either side addressing, and it's been glaringly obvious for decades, is the dire need to drastically shrink the need for those taxes in the first place: i.e the size and especially unfounded scope of government we presently try to maintain to our mutual folly. Yes, we do need some government, and some regulation, but probably only about 1/3 to 1/2 of what we have now, and that includes ENTITLEMENT: personal, corporate and especially international. Al three of those must be address at the same time to have any meaningful effect. Leave out one or more and you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes and frustration.

Now how do we replace what the government is doing for people that they can and should be doing for themselves (a Democratic cry from years ago, ironically)? Well, my top suggestion, and history of mankind proves it works better than anything, is the nuclear family. Why? because through war, disease, anarchy and oppressive government it is the nuclear family that has been proven to best survive through thousands of years. But, that means we must all admit that we can't have our cake and eat it to: no more no-fault divorces, no more serial marriages, no more marriage-less and thus commitment-less family making, making marriage mean something important and worthwhile attaining in our society again and especially no more baby-killing to cover up our responsibilities for our decisions we freely chose to make and want to get out of.

Do those things and you will quickly reduce the size, scope and cost of government, and return to zero-debt national strength within one to two generations.

(03-23-2020 11:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  That's all fine and good when it's being used as intended, but when it's being used to turn the stock market into a cryptocurrency-style pump-and-dump it's a problem. The stock market nearly tripled in value in the last 10 years. That's a bubble, not "buy low sell high."

It is not others' responsibility to prevent you from being stupid, though we can try to encourage you no to. Recognizing how different folks use the markets is part of it. Ever hear of hedging? yeah, thought not. there are ALWAYS opportunities in the market, up or down or sideways, but you do have to be able to do more than just add 1+1. Sorry, it takes effort and patience. No effort and no patience = no reward for you. That's more than fair.

That's the fundamental difference between you and I, isn't it? I want to see us do well, not just me. I realize we're better off when my neighbors have it good too, when those below me have it better than before, and yes, even those above me have it good too. Yeah, I could theoretically walk up to the Dow Jones craps table and throw it all on "Don't Pass" and make a killing, but even if I do well everyone at that table's poorer. It's a little bit sociopathic to say "You can bet on us all to fail, that's an opportunity too."

Quote:

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  There's more to an economy than corporate profits and shareholder dividends. If it's not working for those on the bottom you'll find they end up having to scrounge to get by, which is how you end up with Americans living check to check. For most of America the "economy" is what's in their fridge and checking account more than what's in their portfolio.

What you wrote here is simply NOT true--but you've been conditioned, likely form the leftist "schools" you attended to believe those lies. first of all, most everyone will have both good times and bad--it is an adult responsibility, not the gub-mint's to recognize that. Hedging tough times can be dome in many ways--faith communities that you participate in, contributing to and with in good times for you (may be bad times for others you can help) and vice-versa is a GREAT hedge that too many ignore to their own detriment--that's on them for their free choice. And since when is "having to scrounge to get by" a bad thing? Scrounging through tough times teaches you value and what wants and needs are and how to distinguish. Sad if you haven't experienced this before, but those of us who did and learned have a resilience to know how to be resourceful and get through. Sheltering people from having to work through tough times and failure is a stupid long-term strategy, and harmful to those you purport to feel sorry for. Why non earth would you want to hurt people by preventing them from learning? 'When the going gets tough the tough find a way to get going' used to be a common expression, now it's 'when the going gets tough give me mo' money, gub'mint.' That's not very practical over the long term, is it? As to having to live with little to no savings, I've done that over long-term and learned how to be comfortable without a safety net. It's freeing in a way that can't be described without having been through the fire. Those are the strong in times when they are weak. I wouldn't take that opportunity away from anyone I cared about, even if you would.

This isn't a matter of working or not working. This isn't people wanting to sit on their ass during good times. We can debate like it's still 2019, but things are different right now. We haven't seen anything like this for 100 years. It's not "I don't want to work because I have a Section 8 town house and EBT to take care of me," it's "if I go to work I could bring home something that kills my wife with a heart condition." We're talking about normally productive people being asked to sit this out, or people that are being asked to be productive while putting their loved ones at risk. This isn't just social Darwinism the bootstraps crowd is asking of us, it's actual Darwinism in all of its stark cruelty.

Quote:

(03-23-2020 10:11 AM)Mav Wrote:  You do understand that this mindset is why we're running so short on medical supplies right now, right? "If I pay my workers too much, that would be terrible for business, so I'd better outsource everything to a hostile foreign power that treats their workers like expendable cattle." If you want to see a light being shone on something, it's this mindset and what it's done to our country. If we go back to doing things your way, we'll be setting ourselves up for failure again.

We're running short on some supplies because we have far too many people institutionalized and trained to overuse a system most (not all) do not need to be using in they wasteful an unnecessary ways they do. The current situation is doing an excellent, and necessary, job in pointing this flaw out. Who is responsible? Well, for one his name began with an "O" and he told you a lie that you could have your cake and eat it, too and it would cost you less and give you everything and more and you were stupid enough to believe him and his cronies. So don't blame others who said "I told you so that this wouldn't work, because it doesn't, and you're mad for just now finding that out. Okay, admit the truth and let's start figuring this out.

And it has nothing with our critical supplies being outsourced and our otherwise productive population being kicked into service work they're not suited for, being told to "learn to code" or going around with a needle in one arm and a welfare check in another? The healthcare system had the same cracks before Obamacare and it has the same cracks now. I'm talking supply chain.

Quote:As to basic business sense, it's clear you are too close-minded at the moment to accept basic economics, supply and demand, profit and loss. So sorry, but that is probably caused by the ignorance of your school and lack of real-world experience. But rejoice! You will now get to see and learn some of that for real, so kudos for you! You will have to open your eyes, though. Can't drive too well without being willing to see. As for outsourcing to hostile foreign powers, yada, yada, yada, hey Why are you shooting the messenger? Did not Pres Trump campaign on and promote "America First" and un-globalizing our economy while the Dems were shouting bloody murder and hatred at him? Can you admit the gloabalization of everything, especially our vital interests in times of need was an utterly stupid idea in the first place? But is that not the Dems way? So why are you turning about so quickly here? Truth is if we get about doing things closer to the ways I've espoused above, we'll be better off and so will you. That reality hurts, but here's something that could help you ease the pain:

I'm not a Democrat and it was Republicans just as much as Democrats that caused this mess. Bush 43 was the one that brokered NAFTA, Clinton was the one that signed it. Clinton was the one that started trade with China, Bush 45 watched our manufacturing shrivel up like a raisin and did nothing about it, in fact exacerbating the problem by letting in more and more foreigners to take American jobs. This was all caused by the blind pursuit of profit, business owners thinking Americans wanting their hard work to mean good pay and good healthcare made them "entitled" and instead sending our manufacturing to China, where conditions are so bad they install nets to keep workers from committing suicide off of the side of the buildings, or Mexico, where the workers go home to a two-room shack without running water. Perot had it right, Buchanan had it right, but their approach didn't make people rich and it wasn't good for the Dow so they're now relics. As for Trump, he's trying a demographic gambit of his own, embracing letting in a ton of cheap H1B labor to price our tech workers out of the market in the hopes he could sway South Asians to be reliable Republicans. It's why you see him buddying up with Modi so much.

I do agree that no able-bodied American should be sitting at home on a weekday in normal times. But these are not normal times. We can't take a normal approach to unique times like this.

It's simple... what you tax you get less of, what you subsidize you get more of.

Tax profits, they will report as little in the way of profits as they can... at least 'here'. The problem is that the average voter is a W-2 employee so they can't change their reported income (unless they work under the table, which some do) and doesn't remotely understand 'revenues vs expenses' well enough to support policy... but they love the idea of 'closing loopholes', even though half of what they describe there isn't a loophole at all... so they vote for people who actually work against them. The truly wealthy don't care if you raise income tax rates, because it only makes the value of their tax evasion schemes GREATER.

You can somewhat indiscriminately tax w-2 employees/non-business owners... and also consumption. We're doing the former. States and local governments do the latter somewhat

It's important to note that tax rate cuts are not always tax revenue cuts. Which do we want? Why would we generically NOT support rates that produce the most revenue, regardless of whether that is a higher or lower rate? Look at outcomes/reactions and not merely the headlines... but most voters don't.

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Who is lauding corporations that are mismanaging their balance sheets and championing their rights to bailouts? Besides, isn't it fair to criticize those Americans who can't survive a couple of weeks without a paycheck - especially those who had the means to prepare for possible interruptions of their income stream - regardless of what some mismanaged companies are doing? Clear case of "whataboutism". I wonder of John Oliver ever regretted doing that comedy bit on his show considering I've seen an awful lot of this coming from progressives...

(03-23-2020 08:03 AM)Chappy Wrote:  When wages don't increase at the same rate as things like medical costs and college tuition, you end up with otherwise responsible people in situations they can't dig themselves out of.

Ironically, it's been the progressives who caused these items to balloon in costs that well outpaced inflation.

The Dems got in bed with "BigEd" and "BigMed". It's especially easy to see this with the Fannie Mae debacle since virtually every Dem out there were juicing student loan lending to ridiculous levels plus pouring gobs of cash to their University Cronies whose primary purpose was to enrich themselves by increasing the size of their university budgets.

WTF do we need with 5 Star hotel quality dorms with eating establishments to match???

(03-23-2020 11:37 AM)Mav Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 11:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  It is not others' responsibility to prevent you from being stupid, though we can try to encourage you no to....That's more than fair.

That's the fundamental difference between you and I, isn't it? I want to see us do well, not just me.

Not quite, it seems the fundamental difference is you wish to pick your own winners and losers and you've already decided before having input from the people themselves. The very definition of a socialist/communist attitude of contempt for human value and worth. True, I disagree strongly with that ridiculous anti-human attitude, but I defend your right to be ignorant if that is what you wish. Meantime, many of us gots work ta' do, so get out of our ways, thank you, hoss.

(03-23-2020 11:48 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-23-2020 07:30 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I love how it's fine to get on average American's about not being fiscally responsible, yet we've got countless industries begging for billions in bailouts because they used their profits for stock buybacks. Corporate socialism at its finest.

Who is lauding corporations that are mismanaging their balance sheets and championing their rights to bailouts? Besides, isn't it fair to criticize those Americans who can't survive a couple of weeks without a paycheck - especially those who had the means to prepare for possible interruptions of their income stream - regardless of what some mismanaged companies are doing? Clear case of "whataboutism". I wonder of John Oliver ever regretted doing that comedy bit on his show considering I've seen an awful lot of this coming from progressives...

I think the market does a fair job when left alone of showing loser corporate decisions the door...and of rewarding good ones...thus incentivizing others to keep trying. God Bless America.

(03-23-2020 08:03 AM)Chappy Wrote:  When wages don't increase at the same rate as things like medical costs and college tuition, you end up with otherwise responsible people in situations they can't dig themselves out of.

This sounds great, but the reality is that medical costs have decreased. The cost of bypass surgery and cataract surgery etc etc etc is a fraction of what it was.

What has happened is three major things
1) we now 'expect' to be cured by these things and failures result in lawsuits meaning we've added all sorts of extra levels of 'safety' ... sort of like the 'safety' of a 56 Bel-Air vs a 2020 Hyundai. The car isn't really more expensive, the safety is
2) we now give people this surgery that we wouldn't have given 20 years ago
3) there is now an even better version which IS more expensive, but it's also vastly better care.