Where Are The TeaBaggers Now?

[Lostlover]

Yep. Even with unemployment where it's at. I want Social Programs, believe me. But I have to accept that we can't have everything we want, when we necessarily want it. This is the absolute best thing to do to get spending under control and will actually come close to balancing the budget.

Nobody likes to pay taxes, and yes we are recovering from a recession. At the same time, we have managed to do with having less in the past and we will do it again. We will manage and we will survive it.

The UK is undergoing major fiscal austerity now. And they're predicted to go back into a recession next year.

We're just like the UK and polar opposites of China which is a net exporter. Money has to come in the economy for it to grow. With 8 million people unemployed and the private sector not hiring, can we really afford to start cutting services?

 

[MoltenRock III]

Merry Christmas

Likewise, hopefully you had a wonderful Bodhi holiday.

 

[MystikWizard]

The UK is undergoing major fiscal austerity now. And they're predicted to go back into a recession next year.

We're just like the UK and polar opposites of China which is a net exporter. Money has to come in the economy for it to grow. With 8 million people unemployed and the private sector not hiring, can we really afford to start cutting services?

This article regarding "5 Myths about the Bush Tax Cuts" from the Washington Post is an interesting read I would recommend checking out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/30/AR2010073002671.html

It argues that extending the tax cuts for everyone will not lead to long-term growth or achieve any significant bang for the buck in terms of stimulating the economy.

 

[Lostlover]

This article regarding "5 Myths about the Bush Tax Cuts" from the Washington Post is an interesting read I would recommend checking out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/30/AR2010073002671.html

It argues that extending the tax cuts for everyone will not lead to long-term growth or achieve any significant bang for the buck in terms of stimulating the economy.

These tax cuts are purely political and actually hamper growth. I'm no fan of tax cuts for the wealthy. However cutting spending while being a net importer is disastrous for the economy. And I think when the UK dips into a recession next year, calls for cuts will be deemed counterproductive.

 

[MystikWizard]

These tax cuts are purely political and actually hamper growth. I'm no fan of tax cuts for the wealthy. However cutting spending while being a net importer is disastrous for the economy. And I think when the UK dips into a recession next year, calls for cuts will be deemed counterproductive.

Tax cuts are scheduled to go up 3% for most Americans if the tax cuts expire. That would equate to me in my income bracket of paying a about $1,800 more in Federal Taxes then I would working the job I have now for the entire year.

I would wager must of us on JUB fall in the 25% tax bracket.

Tax Rates for 2010
	Married Couples Filing Jointly / 	Most Single Filers
10% 	Not over $16,750 	/  Not over $8,375
15% 	$16,750 - $68,000 	/  $8,375 - $34,000
25% 	$68,000 - $137,300  / 	$34,000 - $82,400
28% 	$137,300 - $209,250 /	$82,400 - $171,850
33% 	$209,250 - $373,650 /	$171,850 - $373,650
35% 	Over $373,650 /	Over $373,650

That being said, would a 3% tax increase really kill economic growth or is this more fear-mongering? Honest question.

It certainly is not going to break the wealthy as they would just save their money, not hire any additional workers, and distribute it as bonuses amongst their executives. That is why I don't believe in additional tax breaks for the wealthy as they have adapted to doing more with less people, and they are never going to go back to the way things were.

As far as the Middle Class, does anyone here fear a 3% tax increase is going to break you if that means paying down our 13 Trillion debt, while raising the value of the dollar in the global economy?

 

[thewiz]

At the rate they are larding up the bill with the tax cuts, this is going to make those bitching about the stimulus bills passed last year blush.

There have been numerous studies and reports that show the "small businesses" referred to by the Republicans are, in many cases, millionaires and billionaires who have formed L.L.C's for tax purposes. They are not going to hire anyone; they are not going to spend the money; they are going to save and at what point is enough enough?

For all the talk and posturing, neither party is serious about cutting the deficit. The new lard in this bill? A cut in social security payroll tax. Hmmm...didn't we just learn that it is one of the causes for future deficit increases and the system is going broke? Soooo...let's cut what is being paid in so it goes broke quicker and (amazingly) we will "loan" to the Social Security Trust Fund money that we have borrowed!

Yup....I see change has come to Washington.....

 

[Kulindahr]

H
Why don't you go into the kitchen and fix us some sandwiches? Bring Kulindahr a beer, will ya?

Look for a case like this:

Then round up a hot tub.

 

[Kulindahr]

@Kulindahr:

Did you see the latest job figures?

All of the economists had expected huge growth in jobs, ranging from 3- to 600,000 increase of jobs.

Actual amount? 35,000. Every blasted one of them was wrong.

You see what I mean about macroeconomics being a pseudoscience? I really do think you'd do better by consulting the astrological charts.

Herd those. Ugh.

Doesn't surprise me -- down here on the ground, I still see businesses closing, and when there's an opening, hundreds of people show up to apply (a part-time job at a gas station here recently had the place filled with applicants enough it was hard to get around in the little store, for two days). Perhaps worse, there are hundreds of job openings here, but no one qualified to even apply. My gut feeling was that we were actually going to lose jobs.

I forget at the moment who on JUB keeps saying we need new manufacturing; at any rate, I agree. We have the perfect thing for it, too, in thermal depolymerization. With it we could turn trash into fuels and lubricants, reducing the cost of garbage disposal and cutting down on oil imports, providing permanent jobs and keeping money in the country while enhancing national security. My current notion is the federal government funding start-ups, possibly with different companies formed to focus on different specific outputs and in different regions -- and then assign stock proportional to the government's investment in a lottery to those below the poverty line, or something to get the government out of it once things are started.

 

[MoltenRock III]

^thewiz, my colleague Kulindahr and I have posited the notion that perhaps they're trying to inflate the dollar on purpose.

It sounds crazy at first glance, but FDR tried to do it in the early 30s, and inflating the $$ would go a long way towards addressing the trade deficit, as well as other things...

Of course, it would be the equivalent to Hiroshima in Chinese financial markets.

This is already causing a "hot money" situation in China and other Asian economies. As I've mentioned before the Fed is pursuing a massive currency manipulation on the US Dollar, which will force Asian economies to raise the value of their currencies in order to stave off a hot money crisis, ala 1998. This is why it's laughable to China and other Asian nations of America blustering on about China artificially manipulating its Yuan. America is the largest currency manipulator on the planet currently.

 

[Kulindahr]

From one perspective it's sort of inevitable: ship enough of your own currency overseas through trade deficits, and balance has to come somehow.

Better to just keep one's economy (and national budget) healthy in the first place.

 

[Supersix]

No. Get lost!!!!!

 

[MoltenRock III]

Well, I'll be goddamned....

Let me see if I am understanding the sequence of events correctly.

The Fed's doing stuff to deliberately inflate the $$, so that Asian currencies will have to reevaluate theirs?

Hmm. That's profound. (Kulindahr, we called this one right...)

MoltenRock, all of this is stuff that has never been discussed on any news show, not any medium, as far as I know...at least, not in the United States.

Unfortunately, however, the Feds could overdo it, and we could end up with hyperinflation....that wouldn't be good.

You've got it partially right. The Asian economies don't necessarily need to inflate theirs per se, but rather dealing with the huge capital inflows, and of course possible outflows all in one trading session. (We're talking about tens if not hundreds of billions of $$$.) China, Singapore, and South Korea already have been requiring banks to have more money on hand for every dollar outstanding they own. Additionally, as the billions of dollars continue to pour into Asian economies to invest, it creates additional upward pressures on interest rates.

It wouldn't surprise me in the next 20 years that a regional Asian currency gets launched ala the Euro.

 

[Kulindahr]

<chuckle>
We could then tagteam Supersix right there in the tub.

Hot tubs are for relaxing.


If we tossed in a box of tea bags while soaking, would that make us teabaggers?

 

[MoltenRock III]

Hot tubs are for relaxing.


If we tossed in a box of tea bags while soaking, would that make us teabaggers?

We're all dudes after all, so the teabags are part and parcel of the hot tub experience. I have an 8 man hot tub at my new house (10 if you're REALLY good friends). There's already 8 pairs of floating tea bags as is, why do you want more? LMAO!

 

[Kulindahr]

^
You're the one who brought sex into this.

I'm just soaking.


Anyone want to try the redneck version?

 

[MoltenRock III]

So this latest tax deal adds $1 TRILLION to the debt, and yet no teabagging marches. No Fox News parades billed as "grassroots" uprisings, no parades on Washington, no nothing. The Tea Party assholes are frauds. The TP corporate backers like the Koch brothers are getting exactly what they wanted.... their tax cuts. They never gave a shit about the deficits. The TP'ers won't exist in 2012.

 

[Jack Springer]

One thing I don't understand is that if this 2-year tax reduction is going to cost the US $700 billion dollars in debt in the next two years.

In the years 2001 thru 2009, did it cost $700 billion for each 2 year period or $2.8+ trillion in debt or reduced taxes?

Does this make sense?

 

[fetaby]

we have expenses now that we didn't then

There is a new American every 8 seconds.

 

[Jack Springer]

Jack, we have expenses now that we didn't then, for example there are 8 million more people out of work.

Besides the economy was growing then (although not enough to pay for the tax cuts), while it's anemic at best right now.

I know there are other reasons. I am sure a play-by-play accounting is available, if someone wants to go look for it.

Paying for unemployment is not that expensive -- plus we pay part of our salary (those that work) into unemployment insurance -- so it doesn't all come from the government - they administer it and the federal government has added some extended benefits in the last 2 years.

However, you did address -- did we (US GOVT) lose $2.8 trillion dollars during the Bush years. You would have to say that if you believe the continued tax cut will "cost" $700 billion in the next two years.

You get what I'm talking about?

 

[Kulindahr]

Being a major fan of the 1940s, I should have realized it, but the US has owed far more money before, in terms of the percentage of the GDP. During World War 2, we exited the war with over 100% of our GDP owed in debts, and as he has said, Japan owes 170%. By contrast, right now we only owe 60%.

The difference being that back then America understood that paying off one's debts is a moral responsibility, and the rich weren't trying to flinch from it.