Exactly... and this is not only going on in the USA but all over the World... we are now all slowly becoming debt slaves, and the politicians in charge are doing absolutely nothing to prevent this... they just argue about where to make some smaller budget cuts, to make it seem like they are doing something, but eventually we will all end up much like Greece, being ruled by others that we owe money. So, the age of democracy an general prosperity could soon be over... and btw ... don't blame the Chinese, because they are in exactly the same spot and are going to suffer the same fate as the rest of us : http://thediplomat.com/2011/07/05/china’s-ticking-debt-bomb/ So it seems, that we are more or less all in huge debt, even countries that you would think are doing well, at least on the surface .... so the big question is, how is this possible and who are really behind making us all debt slaves ? ... .
No news there.... it's not only the few very rich people who are paying unusually low income taxes... some of the biggest companies in the World do not pay taxes at all : http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/03/news/economy/corporate_taxes/index.htm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/major-corporations-tax-subsidies_n_1073548.html They are sucking money out of your pocket to make you a debt slave, but of course not paying much taxes themselves, if any at all. .
Brilliant minds think alike... http://www.businessinsider.com/closing-the-deficit-is-painless-2012-12
And here is a good part that makes the point, raising taxes on the Rich to close the deficit as Democrats want to claim is total Bullshit. Raising taxes on the rich as a mean to correct income inequality is the real objective (1 that I could get behind if done right).
Though I agree with Ron Paul on most of the issues about what is wrong with the economy and the political system, then I strongly disagree about his view on public health insurance and socialism... because I know for a fact that socialism, or should I say "Welfare capitalism" works in reality, because I actually live in wealthy Scandinavia in the supposed happiest country in the World.... the reason why socialism works here, has of course something to do with the fact, that when the supposed poorest people have good money to spend, then the whole country benefit. .. or in more plain words... when the absolute minimum wage at McDonald's in Denmark is around $19.5 an hour + 6 weeks paid vacation a year and 8% pension + an additional $3 an hour if you work outside normal working hours, or an additional $4 an hour if you work on weekends, then I guess you are not quite so unhappy about your fairly high average income tax rates (that would be around 40%), because you can still afford a good life, not having to work extra jobs and not having to worry about health insurance or how to save money for a higher education for your children, which is all paid for through income taxes... Henry Ford got it all right, when he chose to pay his workers good money, so they could also actually afford the cars they were producing, which was good for business and the whole economy.... making the average worker a debt slave and sucking money out of poor peoples pockets will only make us all suffer, except of course for the few absolute richest people. .
You were worrying me for a second. I feared one of my favorite posters on this forum was a libertarian nut, but you redeemed yourself one hundred times over with this post.
This reply is almost as dumb as the person in your avatar is horrible. Henry Ford chose to pay his workers what he did. He didn't require violent threats to do so like you must advocate for. That's not socialist, or libertarian, or conservative, which are all political philosphies, but rather good business practice, which he was rewarded for by the voluntary actions of his customers.
In reality, however, Ford was reluctant to practice what he preached. But acknowledging the sentiment is a first step in the right direction.
Call me crazy, but I really don't know why any liberal would be against the cliff. Bush tax cuts will disappear and military spending will decrease by a significant amount. Many people on here have claimed (righty so) the Bush tax cuts have unfairly rewarded the wealthy then the elimination of those taxe rates would also punish these same people.
I agree. No need to fix the estate or capital gains taxes after January 1, but then Obama can offer to make permanent the marginal rates on lower and middle class people, include the AMT fix, doc fix, unemployment benefit renewal and a permanent cancellation of the debt ceiling. It is difficult to envision Republicans voting against the Obama Tax Cuts of 2013.
Well, the short circuiting of jobless benefits, the negative impact of spending cuts in a fragile economic recovery, the increase in middle class tax rates... the cliff isn't so good for anybody. But it is ruinous for the hard right. Still, Boehner and Mconnell have to agree to govern in order to avoid the "cliff". Doesn't seem so likely.
Well, you will find some of the answer in the '2012 Big Mac index' below, showing that Danes on average pay $5.37 for a Big Mac, while you only pay $4.20 on average in the USA : http://bigmacindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012-Big-Mac-Index.png .... secondly, McDonald's have managed to avoid paying income taxes in Denmark 25 years in a row... and when you don't pay taxes, it of course either make your profit bigger, or you can use this "saved" money to pay your workers some decent wages... in Denmark they did not have much of a choice, since the labor unions are very strong here..... it is also the main excuses big foreign companies are using, when they do not pay income taxes in Denmark, saying that the money they save on taxes mainly goes to their workers, who then pay their fairly high share of income taxes, so that the taxes are paid in the end, just not by McDonald's but by their workers. .
If it weren't for the loss of the unemployment benefits, the EITC, and general negative effect to the poor, yeah it would be great. I have no problem with having my taxes raised, and even the place I work for getting it's budget reduced (I feel like I have a solid position).
Well, I'd happily pay 15 cents more for a fricking large pizza if I knew that Mr. Papa John would provide health care and other benefits for his workers. However, it's more likely he'd just pay himself another $10 million a year for his amazing leadership and commercial-making qualities. I'll say it again: most of the laws that we've had to pass in this country are just legislating what used to be common sense and business savvy: treat your employees well, treat your customers well, compete fairly in the marketplace. That has to be legislated now, because the people that run businesses are now out-of-touch living-in-a-bubble jerkoffs with no allegiance to country, company, or anything other than the almighty dollar. And yea, I know all sweeping generalizations are wrong.
Yes and the Republicans should give him all those right away, then at the end of February when the spending limit comes around, the hands will be reversed and the only option will be to cut spending since all the Revenue (most of it) will be done. I guess Obama could come back with even higher taxes on the rich (say to 42-45%) but most of the negotiations will fall on the spending side. So right now (after the clif) the democrats will have the republicans by the balls, in February the republicans will have the democrats by the balls. It seems to me that we may get Revenue increases and Spending cuts with each party pulling on each others balls. Then again when you lose money you tend to not pay income taxes. But I doubt they would still in business in Denmark if they did not make any profits for 25 years).
Exactly... big business no longer feel an allegiance to the countries they oprate in, or the people living there... so they will rather cheat on taxes and use cheap chinese workers, who perhaps works 18 hours a day for little to nothing, if it can make them a bigger short-term profit, rather that supporting the local community... then when they close down a factory and move it to China to lower the cost and make a bigger profit, the people in charge forget, that all the workers they lay off and their families, perhaps may not be able to afford to buy the product they used to produce... and they may also not be able to afford to buy as much at the local grocery store and in other places, so that other good businesses then also may be forced to make cuts, leaving even more unemployed workers, who then cant afford to buy the product and support the local economy... there is no long-term profit in poor people or in making people poor, by moving their jobs to China... it's an illusion, if the rich believe they can make a long-term profit this way. As written elsewhere then 30 or so of the largest companies in the USA do not pay income taxes, but actually suck money out of the government.... of course they all make big profits, but they are able to "hide" this money by moving it around abroad and then demand tax cuts... in Denmark, they are forced to pay their workers decent wages, which means that much of the money they save on taxes end up in the pockets of the workers and eventually also get properly taxed in this way, because the average worker usually is not able to cheat, but pay their income taxes... .
Bottom line, the USA fiscal problems would go away if we raised salaries for every worker and reduced unemployment...
The big companies usually try to scare governments by saying that they will move all their business abroad, if they are forced to raise salaries... the fact of the matter is, that they perfectly well know, that if they all moved their business to China or places like this, there wouldn't be any people in Europe or the USA to buy their fairly expensive products, because they would all be out of work... again... making people in Europe and the USA poor, by moving high wage jobs to China on a larger scale, would only bankrupt the big companies, because they would not be able to sell their products. .
Well they would sell them in China right, if all the jobs were moved to China, then the demand would be in China, so companies would just need to sell their products in China to not go bankrupt. As a matter of fact wage pressures in China are making the lets produce in China business strategy less profitable, soon the Chinese will be too wealthy to be exploited as much as the past, so China will move to a middle income country, then the factories will need to move to a lower wage country/continent, perhaps Africa. Then people will be bitching about how those evil corporations are now moving all the Chinese jobs to Africa and Africa will be as hated as China. Here is a story about FoxConn (Taiwan), the company that makes the I-pads and is having the suicide problems. http://www.economist.com/news/busin...urer-keep-growing-and-improve-its-margins-now
Here is another example on china raising wages (still way below first world standards for sure). ' http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21566782-cheaper-china-and-credit-and-oil-about-start-flowing-mexico-becoming
As it is now, the Chinese workers are paid so little, that they usually cant afford the products they are making for export... the Chinese workers who are making the iPhone 5 for Apple would never be able to afford buying one themselves. .
Nope, but other Chinese people higher on the wage scale can buy them, http://whdi-reviews.com/2012/12/app...es-sales-figures-above-2-1-million-in-3-days/ I mean should workers that manufacture luxury boats be able to afford one? Is an I-phone really a basic necessity? I imagine the biggest problem for the low wage employees is finding affordable housing (housing bubbles hurt them, specially in Chinese cities), also being able to afford enough calories (food) to feed their families. Also by the article more vacation time to enjoy their money.