Notices
Results 1 to 56 of 56
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By westwind
  • 1 Post By chad
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox

Thread: Rich hiding more than US & UK economies combined

  1. #1 Rich hiding more than US & UK economies combined 
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a


    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:24 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Whilst the minimum figure claimed that the rich are hiding is $21,000,000,000,000 (yes that's right $21 'trillion') it is claimed that the true figure could actually be $32,000,000,000,000, in secret tax havens by the end of 2010, according to a major study.

    Wealthy hiding $21 trillion in tax havens, report says - World - CBC News

    BBC News - Tax havens: Super-rich 'hiding' at least $21tn

    Global super-rich hide $21 trillion in tax havens - CNN.com

    The Mega Rich Are Hiding At Least $21 Trillion In Offshore Tax Havens [Study] - Business Insider


    This seems pretty incredible and most annoying to those of us that do pay our taxes.
    Funny that at time when Europe is in a debt crisis and ordinary americans can no longer afford their home repayments we find out just how extensive this massive tax fiddle has become.

    Do you know what would happen to an economy if 21 trillion was released in it? Think about it for a minute....

    Governments/politicians love to deflect/redirect blame, however, the rich are not the problem, nor are their hoards, the problem is found in answering the questions of how and why that much money has been printed/created in the first place by government/s. Know this, every dime can be taken out of these hoards and put into an economy, and guess what, the price of everything would increase accordingly (increase to reflect the new total amount of currency in circulation) and the poor will still be poor, the middle class will still be in trouble and the rich will still be demonized..... nothing will change.... That is until people demand that the biggest crooks, governments and politicians, stop creating fiat money which only makes the wealthy the middle class, the middle class poor, and the poor poorer.


    Last edited by gonzales56; July 24th, 2012 at 04:56 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:25 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post

    Do you know what would happen to an economy if 21 trillion was released in it? Think about it for a minute....

    Governments/politicians love to deflect/redirect blame, however, the rich are not the problem, nor are their hoards, the problem is found in answering the questions of how and why that much money has been printed/created in the first place by government/s. Know this, every dime can be taken out of these hoards and put into an economy, and guess what, the price of everything would increase accordingly (increase to reflect the new total amount of currency in circulation) and the poor will still be poor, the middle class will still be in trouble and the rich will still be demonized..... nothing will change.... That is until people demand that the biggest crooks, governments and politicians, stop creating fiat money which only makes the wealthy the middle class, the middle class poor, and the poor poorer.

    I think what you'll find is this money is already part of the economy as the people that own it can spend and use it at any time, what is mean't is that this money is being hidden away from the authorities so as to avoid taxation.

    This means that the rest of us have to pay more than our fair share of tax to make up for the trillions of untaxed wealth of the super rich, is that fair the poor and middle classes paying for the tax bills of the super rich?

    With all the extra tax revenue, that could be generated if this money was being taxed, countries economic deficits could be wiped out, more social housing for the homeless, free health care for the poor, investment in jobs and enviromentally friendly new energy projects.

    All these good things that could be done are being stiffled by a few very selfish very rich people who don't even really need the money. Many of the worlds countries are in debt, is there any wonder when the rich hide their money?
    The gdp of the United States is about 15 trillion... However, the federal and state governments in the US, alone, inject/account for about 7 trillion of that gdp, and so, the total amount of funds being spent/circulated by the people/companies is about 8 trillion. Add in what banks, firms and utilities/energy companies move around and the GDP numbers for common folks goes way down. This 21 trillion you are speaking of is not part of the economy and if 21 trillion was released into an economy, that economy would collapse.

    A larger amount of money in circulation does not equal greater wealth, it equals higher prices. Every time a government produces/creates a larger amount of currency for circulation they are taking/stealing wealth and value away from every person, and of course, the poor are effected first, the middle class next and then the rich. Governments can feed the poor, house the homeless, pay for medical needs, etc., however, each and every dime they create to pay for these programs not only ends up hurting the people they are trying to help, it creates a larger and larger class of poor folks and in the end, when it all crashes down, the suffering and hardships will be unimaginable and unbearable for most americans.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:26 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:26 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    What I'm afraid you seem to not undersatnding is this money is already part of the global economy, as far as I'm aware this survey was limitted to the US alone, this is because the owners of this money can go and spend it at any time, that's why it's called money.

    All the saving's stuffed into people's mattress's, that no longer trust banks, are also part of the economy of whatever country produced that money. That's how it works once the money has been produced, whilst ever it is 'legal tender', it is part of the economy because it can't be spent at any time.

    The mere fact that this money exists reduces the value of all the rest of the money.

    This is all about tax avoidance and hiding of assets, not and never about reducing a countries money supply.



    P.S. Just for clarification, any large enough amount of money being spent in any economy can have a effect, but it is no different for oridinary people to go out and and start spending money on mass as for the super rich spending their hidden assets.
    Currency that is hoarded, saved, not in circulation, stored, is not part of an economy. However, if the hoards and saving are released (by any means or for any reason) then the value of that currency will suffer a loss.

    Taxing savings or hoards is not a healthy economic plan. Taxing the rich and their savings will only lead to higher prices for those who already have a hard enough time paying for many things.

    You are wrong concerning the impact of the super rich spending on a massive scale... The super rich, when they spend that way, they make or break markets..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:26 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post
    You are wrong concerning the impact of the super rich spending on a massive scale... The super rich, when they spend that way, they make or break markets..
    Ok I'm going to explain this for the last time. This is not about the super rich spending their money. If you read the clarification I made before your last post I have already agreed that anyone spending vast amounts of money can effect an economy. But that is same whether the super rich are spending money from assets that are known about and already taxed by government or money hidden for tax purposes and can also be effected by ordinary people collectively going out and spending their savings the affects are the same, it's part of the economy and effects it in the same way. When money exists that you can spend it is part of the economy.

    How and why you could think that someone spending money they have hidden away for tax purposes would have different results than someone spending money from an asset they've paid their tax on seems highly illogical.

    21 trillion dollars is more money than what every single person in the world spends in the US over multiple years. Releasing 21 trillion dollars, or even a percentage of it, will cripple the middle class and the poor.

    That money is also there legally and you can rest assured it has seen the hands of government/s all over it before it found its current resting place. It is not illegal to put ones money in banks, firms, companies, institution, governments, etc., that are located all around the world. Many people put their money/assets/goods in places that governments cannot touch or take... It is a smart thing to do and everyone should have some value stored somewhere that only they and their loved ones can touch/take/use.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    To all Posts. How is this ( hidden money ) accumulated in the first place? Is it like the Estate of Lang Handcock and the carve up of ongoing revenue from Minerals and natural gas being produced in Western Australia? The Australian Economy is built around the revenue raised from exporting Mining Products to China as the main market. The daughter of Lang Handcock is the wealthest woman in Australia, I'd be happy to say the wealthest woman in the world. Her daily revenue ( currently ) is reputed to be about 5 million dollars au. So this is how wealth is created? Wealth taken from the earth of a Nation? Going to one person? Oh, I found it so its mine? What about legislation dealing with the States rights to pay a royalty to the finder, and then, on behalf of the Nation, develope the assett. How come this didn't happen? So it is OK for a few individuals to make the rest of us dance to the tune they have selected? So it has been throughout Capitalist History. That's what brought on the French Revolution. I've got my plate ready. And I like Chocolate cake. westwind.
    chad likes this.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    What I'm afraid you seem to not undersatnding is this money is already part of the global economy, as far as I'm aware this survey was limitted to the US alone, this is because the owners of this money can go and spend it at any time, that's why it's called money.

    All the saving's stuffed into people's mattress's, that no longer trust banks, are also part of the economy of whatever country produced that money. That's how it works once the money has been produced, whilst ever it is 'legal tender', it is part of the economy because it can't be spent at any time.

    The mere fact that this money exists reduces the value of all the rest of the money.

    This is all about tax avoidance and hiding of assets, not and never about reducing a countries money supply.



    P.S. Just for clarification, any large enough amount of money being spent in any economy can have a effect, but it is no different for oridinary people to go out and and start spending money on mass as for the super rich spending their hidden assets.
    Well, it would be part of the economy if it is being lent out or otherwise invested. However, it's also possible they're not investing it. Just letting it sit in available form. The reason to do that would be if you anticipate that the price of something such as a stock or real estate is going to bottom out.

    Probably a lot of it is sitting in banks, which then lend it out, but in a sense that means they're effectively printing more of it (since it exists in two places: the bank account, and the hands of whoever it was lent to.) They only have to have a small fraction of the money available at any given time.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:27 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by westwind View Post
    To all Posts. How is this ( hidden money ) accumulated in the first place? Is it like the Estate of Lang Handcock and the carve up of ongoing revenue from Minerals and natural gas being produced in Western Australia? The Australian Economy is built around the revenue raised from exporting Mining Products to China as the main market. The daughter of Lang Handcock is the wealthest woman in Australia, I'd be happy to say the wealthest woman in the world. Her daily revenue ( currently ) is reputed to be about 5 million dollars au. So this is how wealth is created? Wealth taken from the earth of a Nation? Going to one person? Oh, I found it so its mine? What about legislation dealing with the States rights to pay a royalty to the finder, and then, on behalf of the Nation, develope the assett. How come this didn't happen? So it is OK for a few individuals to make the rest of us dance to the tune they have selected? So it has been throughout Capitalist History. That's what brought on the French Revolution. I've got my plate ready. And I like Chocolate cake. westwind.
    My friend as always I find your post illuminating as here you have given a great example of the point in hand, it not an individual or company alone that can generate such wealth it is the efforts of people, resources and nations.

    If any of us are having to pay tax then everyone able to afford to do so should also, I find the idea that trillions of untaxed money has been hidden away from sight by vastly wealthy people offensive and is just a form of stealing from the rest of us.

    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post
    21 trillion dollars is more money than what every single person in the world spends in the US over multiple years. Releasing 21 trillion dollars, or even a percentage of it, will cripple the middle class and the poor.
    Also I want to make absolutely clear, money that is hidden away for avoiding tax, can and is still being 'spent'. The people that are hiding this money are not going out and burning it, they are no more or less likely to spend it as the rest of us with our own money. Money is moved around all the time to buy shares and commodities and is also used for investing in property and other assets.

    The $21 tillion being talked about is not some static figure that is no longer or could no longer be spent, it is being spent all the time just like any other money, the only difference is it is being done without the knowledge of the tax authorities.

    This is how and why this money is part of several countries economies, it is still being used just like any other money in existance.

    What you are not digesting is the fact that 21 trillion dollars is a lot of money and the entire world, including all the people, every government and all businesses do not spend that much money in the US in a year.

    The money is being stored, hoarded, not spent. It is also not the only money that is hoarded either... Companies, firms, government etc all hoard money/assets/valuables.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by westwind View Post
    To all Posts. How is this ( hidden money ) accumulated in the first place? Is it like the Estate of Lang Handcock and the carve up of ongoing revenue from Minerals and natural gas being produced in Western Australia? The Australian Economy is built around the revenue raised from exporting Mining Products to China as the main market. The daughter of Lang Handcock is the wealthest woman in Australia, I'd be happy to say the wealthest woman in the world. Her daily revenue ( currently ) is reputed to be about 5 million dollars au. So this is how wealth is created? Wealth taken from the earth of a Nation? Going to one person? Oh, I found it so its mine? What about legislation dealing with the States rights to pay a royalty to the finder, and then, on behalf of the Nation, develope the assett. How come this didn't happen? So it is OK for a few individuals to make the rest of us dance to the tune they have selected? So it has been throughout Capitalist History. That's what brought on the French Revolution. I've got my plate ready. And I like Chocolate cake. westwind.
    Crooked/dirty nations and the people who run them create and created these massive surpluses of fiat currencies.

    Do not get me wrong either, I do not blame them. If people allow others to cut down a tree, take a chunk of bark from that tree and use that piece of bark to pay for the whole tree, then that is exactly what is going to happen. Governments dictate that they are allowed to create money of no value in order to use to purchase things of real value, and as long as they do this, or are allowed to do this, massive amounts of fiat money will be stored away, saved for later, to buy up real valuable assets. Unfortunately for the middle class and poor, like I keep trying to explain, when the day comes that these type of hoards are broken into, used, etc., the middle class and poor will not be able to afford anything.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:28 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post

    What you are not digesting is the fact that 21 trillion dollars is a lot of money and the entire world, including all the people, every government and all businesses do not spend that much money in the US in a year.

    The money is being stored, hoarded, not spent. It is also not the only money that is hoarded either... Companies, firms, government etc all hoard money/assets/valuables.


    Where to begin !!!

    You seem to have gotten some of this backwoods and some well just plain confused, let me set you straight.

    1.) The money being talked about is a global figure, not just applicable to the US.
    2.) The amount of money being talked about in the study was collated from data from Bank of International Settlements, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and national governments.
    3.) The money being talked about is and always has been part of the Global economy, it at no stage ever left.
    4.) $21 trillion entering the economy would have a major impact, however also $21 trillion leaving the economy would also have a major impact, the point being neither has occurred because the money never left the economy.

    i.) $21 trillion could not have left the global economy, ( $21 trillion is about 37% GGDP ) there is not enough cash for it have been removed in cash, if it was supposedly removed by bank transfer then that money will still be registered, it has to be registered as existing at a specific location, if not then the owner would have lost all their money. While ever money is electronically registered it exists as part of the banking system and allows banks to use it as colateral to able to make loans.

    ii.) If the money was used to purchase assets then the owners would own the assets but the money still remains in the economy, it just means they have spent it.

    5.) When people hide money from the tax authorities they do it to avoid losing money, sounds kind of obvious there, however when you have large amounts of money you invest it, otherwise with in inflation the value of your money goes down. No sane rich person is going to hide money from the tax authority only to see it dwindle away when they should be getting a basic 10 - 15% ROI. Most people in this wealth bracket have several advisors and accountants to help invest their wealth to get the best returns.
    If they put their money in some giant black hole never to be seen again their accountants would be having them shipped off to the funny farm.

    6.) Some of this money ends up being used to purchase government bonds for which the government then has to repay a return to the investor every year, the most popular are the 10 year bonds. This means that governments instead of getting the money they should in tax end up selling more of their debt to investors thus getting themselves further in debt and making the tax dodging investors even richer. Which means the ordinary man in the street is then responsible for repaying the government debt to investors.

    The federal reserve buys up most of the US bonds, and they are buying up bonds from all over the world too. This is not the people paying back or down debt, this is the government using newly created fiat federal reserve notes to pay their bills and play their games. Most wealthy folks are surely not going to buy US government bonds but, they surely are selling older ones to the government.

    Inflation occurs due to more and more currency being introduced into an economy/market. Wealthy folks who earn their money are not foolish enough to keep that money in cash or bonds and they do not invest in fiat currencies/money. They will not have billions in cash, let alone trillions. Every time trillions in cash is sitting around it is done so by people who were given that money by governments, and given to them for free. Call them bail outs, loans or QE whatever you want but, these people, and these accounts, tend to have a massive well of fiat currency in their coffers thanks to governments.

    Ordinary people, and all people, pay for their governments debt, and the debt of other governments, through inflation and redistribution of wealth. Again though, when this 21 trillion, or any of the other trillions and trillions of dollars hit the economy, there will be hell to pay.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:28 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post
    Ordinary people, and all people, pay for their governments debt, and the debt of other governments, through inflation and redistribution of wealth. Again though, when this 21 trillion, or any of the other trillions and trillions of dollars hit the economy, there will be hell to pay.
    You were doing so well until you got to this point, I don't know how many times or how many ways I can explain this, if the $21 trillion had left the Global economy then at that time it would have been a major event, also a $21 trillion introduction of would be a major event. But neither has happened or can happen.
    The US Federal Reserve would have replaced this money as it left. Their job is to keep the currency's value static (or slightly inflating) by adding and/or removing currency. If the 21 Trillion entered the economy slowly, the Fed would gradually pull money out of the system to make room for it. If it entered it all at once, there would be nothing the Fed could do.



    In fact the only way for that to happen would be to go out and find the $21 trillion destroy all that money, then you would have global consequence, and then at some point in the future suddenly go out and 'create' from scratch $21 trillion.
    The Federal Reserve can do both things.

    But as I said and I'll say again this has not happened and will not happen.

    All that has happened is a few very rich and greedy people have used various loop holes to hide their money away from the taxman.
    What we haven't discussed that's even more possible is a lot of that money could be dirty money that's getting moved around by organized crime. If so then it's natural for it to go un-taxed because it doesn't have a legitimate paper trail. If they ever succeed at laundering it, then we'd get taxes from it. If we can find it and prove that it's dirty, then the government could seize the whole thing. Either change would be for the better.

    Of course, the SEC kept the files for many of its pending high profile cases in "Building 7", the third skyscraper to fall on the day of the September 11 attacks. If by some chance the SEC were getting close to finding some portion of that 21 Trillion...... well then you have your conspiracy motive. Colombian drug cartels are known to down whole passenger planes just to kill one guy. They'd probably also be willing to blow up 3 buildings just to take down one.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:29 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post

    The US Federal Reserve would have replaced this money as it left. Their job is to keep the currency's value static (or slightly inflating) by adding and/or removing currency. If the 21 Trillion entered the economy slowly, the Fed would gradually pull money out of the system to make room for it. If it entered it all at once, there would be nothing the Fed could do.

    Wow, wrong, misleading, confusing and off the point of what we were discussing all in one go.

    No country in the world is just gonna make room for $21 trillion, BTW what is that even supposed to mean? Oh come here we'll make room for your trillions of dollars.
    Again for the hundreth time this money is being hidden from the taxman throughout the world not just in or by americans. Also money doesn't just pop in and out of existance it's either money or it's not. Money is actually basically a form of debt, the banks promise to honour paper money thus giving it value meaning you can spend it.
    This debt or promise by the banks exists whilst ever the money exists, no matter where money is.
    Fiat money actually does "pop up out of thin air" and its supply is ever increasing. You seem completely unaware concerning how the US Government, federal reserve, central banks, BIS and their partners/friends operate/run the economy and the money supply.

    The federal reserve does not operate in debt or on debt. They create, out of thin air, what they need and want. Their mandate is to make sure that so much new money is created that inflation is a reality and they have multiple ways and means of injecting trillions of dollars into the market place to insure inflation occurs. Savings/Hoards, reduce inflation and they are not part of the economy..... They can be but, they are not. When inflation is to low for the fed, they create new money hand over fist to boost inflation and they manipulate interest rates down to punish savers and inject their savings into the economy. When inflation is higher than the fed wants, they slow down the production of new money and they manipulate interest rates upwards to promote savings in order to decrease, or slow down, the total amount of currency in the market place.

    The fed is constantly producing new money, in the trillions to counter saving, to manipulate markets, to give the impression of growth, to give to the white house, congress, companies, other nations, banks and friends and all of this new currency is created out of thin air and is not debt , it is mandate. It is policy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5
    What you are doing is simply saying "Oh Hey! The rich hide a lot of their money" and somehow drawing an implied conclusion on the necessity, legality, or morality of the act of hiding the money. Instead, you are completely forgetting the underlying causes which force these rich people to hide their money; in a society in which the rich would have no reason to hide their money, they wouldn't. The reason- or main reason- for this hiding of money is to avoid taxes. The normative position is that either A) Taxes should be lowered (so that the rich can put the money back into the economy) or B) These accounts should be closed; I don't think that many people favour these accounts staying as is. Now, if you lower taxes or close these accounts, eventually the money is going to come back into the economy. The difference is that under the first option, less of this money will be given to inefficient bureaucracies and more will be invested into the private sector. On the other hand, the second option prompts the ever-expanding hand of government with more money going into the public sector, instead of the private sector. Furthermore, the second option stagnates incentives for effective investment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:30 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Whilst the minimum figure claimed that the rich are hiding is $21,000,000,000,000 (yes that's right $21 'trillion') it is claimed that the true figure could actually be $32,000,000,000,000, in secret tax havens by the end of 2010, according to a major study.

    Wealthy hiding $21 trillion in tax havens, report says - World - CBC News

    BBC News - Tax havens: Super-rich 'hiding' at least $21tn

    Global super-rich hide $21 trillion in tax havens - CNN.com

    The Mega Rich Are Hiding At Least $21 Trillion In Offshore Tax Havens [Study] - Business Insider


    This seems pretty incredible and most annoying to those of us that do pay our taxes.
    Funny that at time when Europe is in a debt crisis and ordinary americans can no longer afford their home repayments we find out just how extensive this massive tax fiddle has become.

    I wish the US government, and England's government, would look for that money, and take it. And then use that money to pay off our national debts. What a dream. What a dream.
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Pure capitalist countries always fall apart. It happened in Ancient South America, China, Egypt, Rome, ex.ex.ex.

    The way pure capitalist countries always fall apart, always happens the same. Basically the rich get greedy, they take control of government, they stop paying taxes, the regular people start to go into debt, the government goes into debt, and then the government/country collapses.

    What if all the countries governments, that the money was from, found that money, then took that money, and paid off the governments and regular citizens debts.

    It could restart the whole capitalist machine, back to a time when their was no debt, and everyone was doing good.
    Last edited by chad; July 31st, 2012 at 02:01 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Its seems the (pure) capitalist western countries/Japan, all have national debts. America, England, Germany, France, ex.ex. as if its their stage in the process of capitalism.

    But countries like India and China, are just starting to go into that present capitalist system.

    I wonder if India and China, have deficits and national debt?
    I wonder if India and China, dont have enough money to pay for all their past social programs, like England and America?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    It could restart the whole capitalist machine, back to a time when their was no debt, ....
    There was no such time. Capitalism = debt. Dept to invest based on risk and potential gain. The problem is too programs at the national level aren't investments in the future such as roads, education, national security etc.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Pure capitalist countries always fall apart. It happened in Ancient South America, China, Egypt, Rome, ex.ex.ex.

    The way pure capitalist countries always fall apart, always happens the same. Basically the rich get greedy, they take control of government, they stop paying taxes, the regular people start to go into debt, the government goes into debt, and then the government/country collapses.

    What if all the countries governments, that the money was from, found that money, then took that money, and paid off the governments and regular citizens debts.

    It could restart the whole capitalist machine, back to a time when their was no debt, and everyone was doing good.
    That's not pure capitalism, bud. That's crony capitalism- which no proponent of pure capitalism advocates.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    It could restart the whole capitalist machine, back to a time when their was no debt, ....
    There was no such time. Capitalism = debt. Dept to invest based on risk and potential gain. The problem is too programs at the national level aren't investments in the future such as roads, education, national security etc.
    EDITED, after reading Lynx_Fox's comments.


    Pure, large, strong and complex capitalist societies, have a chain of events that happens with the passing of time.

    The following is an example, of the process of pure capitalism.

    1.) The rich get greedy
    2.) the rich take over government
    3.) The rich stop paying taxes
    4.) The poor go into debt
    5.) The government goes into debt
    6.) The country/government falls apart.

    This happened in ancient Rome, China, South America, Egypt, ex.ex.ex.


    The same thing is currently happening in America like clock work.

    Today in America.

    1. The rich CEO's lawyers write all of our laws, they control our government.
    2. Billionaires Warren Buffet and Bill Gates pay 17% in taxes, while regular Americans pay 30%+. And both these billionaires state they could pay 0% taxes if they wanted too.
    3. Regular Americans have more debt than ever.
    4. Our state and federal governments, do not have the money to pay for all social programs, or fully fund programs like NASA.

    In the 1970's did America have the 1-4 listed things happening? No.
    This is the natural process of a certain kind of capitalism.

    And you can also see the same effects in countries such as Germany, England, France, Greece, Japan ex.ex.ex.
    These effects being deficits, national debt, lack of money for social programs, and perhaps? increased personal debt?
    They may not 100% follow the above listed 1-6, but they seem to following many.


    I have listed 4 examples of ancient capitalist countries, that followed the process of capitalism.
    Then I have listed 6 examples of present day capitalists countries, that are following the same process of capitalism.


    Can you list 1 capitalist country, that has not followed this process of capitalism? If you can not, I must be correct.


    This process does not effect socialist minded countries like Switzerland, Norway, Finland ex.ex.ex. Because their government does not allow it to happen.
    The following evidence supports my last claim even further.


    Out of all the major economy Western countries, which one is the most anti-socialist? America is.
    Countries like Germany, France, and England have a socialist voice in their governments.

    And Americas deficits, national debt, and personal debt are much higher, than the some what socialist minded countries of Germany, France, and England.







    The following is an example of how this happens. In pure capitalist America, if a drug making company makes a pill, that cost 5 cents to make, they are allowed to sell that pill for $25.00.

    But in somewhat socialist minded countries like Germany, France, and England this is not allowed. If a drug company tries that in those countries, the government stops them, and forces them to sell the pill at a fair price. Actions like this cause citizens to have less debt, because goods are not allowed to be sold for inflated and unfair prices.


    Its just one example how pure capitalist Americas, drug making CEO's got greedy, and take money from regular people, by charging unfair prices.
    The same thing is happening with American power plant companies, their rich CEO's are getting greedy, and raising rates.
    The same thing is also happening in other American industries as well.
    The above process of capitalism, shows the greedy rich cause regular people to go into debt, by charging unfair prices. But like I said this is the natural process of pure capitalism, and all the listed data supports my claim.


    Can you list 1 pure capitalists minded country, that did not follow the process of capitalism, in some way?


    Ancient Rome, China, South America, and Egypt all followed this process.
    And the present day countries of America, Germany, England, France, Greece, and Japan are following many/most of the processes of capitalism as well.
    Last edited by chad; August 1st, 2012 at 07:34 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lordknukle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Pure capitalist countries always fall apart. It happened in Ancient South America, China, Egypt, Rome, ex.ex.ex.

    The way pure capitalist countries always fall apart, always happens the same. Basically the rich get greedy, they take control of government, they stop paying taxes, the regular people start to go into debt, the government goes into debt, and then the government/country collapses.

    What if all the countries governments, that the money was from, found that money, then took that money, and paid off the governments and regular citizens debts.

    It could restart the whole capitalist machine, back to a time when their was no debt, and everyone was doing good.
    That's not pure capitalism, bud. That's crony capitalism- which no proponent of pure capitalism advocates.


    Pure capitalism is the best word I could think of.

    I would call America the worlds purest capitalist country. America fully allows the free markets to take Americas jobs. America allows drug companies and power companies to charge what ever prices they want, no matter how inflated and unfair they are. And Americas government never stops these things.

    I have heard the word crony capitalism used many times, but I do not know what it means. I hope one day I will read about what crony capitalism is.

    Thanks for telling me the correct term,
    Chad.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Pure, large, strong and complex capitalist societies, always start off with regular people having no debt, and regular people doing well.
    Such as?

    Early colonial America was established by debt from huge corporation willing to borrow to fund the ships, supplies etc in exchange for potential gains such as making money off of trade, food, furs etc.

    The East Coast Nantucket whaling industry mostly led by the Quakers became one of America's most induring investment models how to use dept to invest and diversity investments into a number of ships so loosing one didn't cripple the gains.

    There are many examples.

    Debt is at the very heart of capitalism--without dept you don't get "large, strong and complex capitalist societies,"
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    I think the communist/socialist tone has taken over but, the reality is that these attacks on savings are silly. Again, it is not illegal to put money in foreign nations, off shore accounts, assets or private banks.

    The United States of America has the power and authority, through the fed, to print as much money as it wishes. Nations that can do this are not, and never can be, truly in debt.. Again, as I am typing this, the US Government is printing/creating trillions of dollars to buy its own bonds (it is impossible to be in debt to yourself), to run its economy, to run and manipulate the stock market, to buy commercial bonds, to prop up companies, etc..

    When one see's trillions of dollars over seas, in private offshore banks, etc., this is not money that is hidden from governments... This is money that federal reserve members, or their friends, have acquired directly from the federal reserve (themselves).

    The notion that 21 trillion is sitting in private banks and that 21 trillion has been put there by shadowy figures is purely the imagination of people who perhaps need medication. We know that the federal reserve members gave themselves (their banks) at least 4 trillion dollars between 2007-2010, and this is not counting the other trillion and trillions of dollars these fed members gave themselves and other banks for the purpose of buying stocks, bonds, companies etc on behalf of the US government for fed policy/goals... This is nothing new, and the banks that are mentioned in the article itself are riddled with fed members, work with and for the federal reserve (a client) and any suggestion that these banks, as well as many others, are hiding money from themselves (the federal reserve / US government / other governments) just do not understand how the federal reserve, governments and banks operate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Pure, large, strong and complex capitalist societies, always start off with regular people having no debt, and regular people doing well.
    Such as?

    Early colonial America was established by debt from huge corporation willing to borrow to fund the ships, supplies etc in exchange for potential gains such as making money off of trade, food, furs etc.

    The East Coast Nantucket whaling industry mostly led by the Quakers became one of America's most induring investment models how to use dept to invest and diversity investments into a number of ships so loosing one didn't cripple the gains.

    There are many examples.

    Debt is at the very heart of capitalism--without dept you don't get "large, strong and complex capitalist societies,"


    All I am saying is this, in a capitalist society something (like) the following happens with time.

    1.) the rich hoard, pay less taxes, take control of the government, ex.ex.
    2.) regular citizens debt rises with time.
    3.) the governments debt rises with time.
    4.) the government falls apart.

    And you gave me another thing to add to the process of capitalism,

    Debt is at the very heart of capitalism--without dept you don't get "large, strong and complex capitalist societies,"
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:15 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    I deleted this post b/c I was ranting.
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:09 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    I deleted this post b/c I was ranting.
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:10 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    I deleted this post b/c I was ranting.
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:11 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post

    Do you know what would happen to an economy if 21 trillion was released in it? Think about it for a minute....
    Sorry for ranting on you Gonzales56.
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:12 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    [QUOTE=Chrisgorlitz;340881]






    American billionaire Warren Buffet says, "when I get the tax cuts, I just put the money in the bank, and the money just sits there, and it does no good."
    He says, "if you want to create jobs, you should give poor people the money."

    Buffet says if the government gave poor people money, they would go out and spend it. They would go to movie theaters, restaurants, and shopping. He says that consumer spending would creates jobs, and stimulate the whole economy. This is were a large part of that $21 trillion should go. And for the rich protectors "that money will once again trickle up to the rich."




    The idea that the $21 trillion dollars best use, is being in illegal bank accounts, makes no sense.

    1.) People need services that they are not getting. 2.) Service people need jobs they are not getting. Were is the money to get 1. and 2. together?


    I have heard people say, that the thing that made America great, was the USA knocking rich people on their ass, when they got too much money and power.
    At some time in the 1900's, certain Americans got so rich they started to control the government. The US government then put massive taxes on them, just to take them out of power. And the US government even put massive taxes on their kids, so they could not take their parents money and get into power themselves. But this USA spirit that maintains balanced and good capitalism is gone.
    Last edited by chad; August 2nd, 2012 at 05:39 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    a
    Last edited by Ascended; September 16th, 2012 at 01:30 PM. Reason: removed at my request
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    American billionaire Warren Buffet says, "when I get the tax cuts, I just put the money in the bank, and the money just sits there, and it does no good."
    Of course! Largely because there's little motivation to invest the money in an environment with people bitch about corporate taxes, or further penalize them for investing by increasing capital gains taxes. The more it cost to invest, the more incentive there is to look for ways around the system--whether you're lower-middle class just putting a few hundred $ away every month, a plumber trying to start a small business, or a multi-millionaire.

    --
    Perhaps one day all money will be replaced with electronic money and for every pound or dollar they could assign a unique identification number that's tacked on a central database and stored alongside an id number for the currect owner
    Eventually that could be true, but with banks and credit card companies wanting to increase charges for electronic transfers of anykind, they are stalling the transition from cash.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    Pure, large, strong and complex capitalist societies, always start off with regular people having no debt, and regular people doing well.
    Such as?

    Early colonial America was established by debt from huge corporation willing to borrow to fund the ships, supplies etc in exchange for potential gains such as making money off of trade, food, furs etc.

    The East Coast Nantucket whaling industry mostly led by the Quakers became one of America's most induring investment models how to use dept to invest and diversity investments into a number of ships so loosing one didn't cripple the gains.

    There are many examples.

    Debt is at the very heart of capitalism--without dept you don't get "large, strong and complex capitalist societies,"


    All I am saying is this, in a capitalist society something (like) the following happens with time.

    1.) the rich hoard, pay less taxes, take control of the government, ex.ex.
    2.) regular citizens debt rises with time.
    3.) the governments debt rises with time.
    4.) the government falls apart.

    And you gave me another thing to add to the process of capitalism,

    Debt is at the very heart of capitalism--without dept you don't get "large, strong and complex capitalist societies,"
    Chad, taking on private debt for the purpose of real investment does not lead to, or cause, numbers 2-4. This type of debt creates income/wealth for the person taking on the debt.

    The type of debt you are referring to is debt for the purpose of consumption, and this type of debt appeals to those, and is demanded by those, who feel they are entitled to products and services they don't need or cannot afford. This is the type of debt that sucks the life out of people and governments.... This type of debt is not capitalism.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    American billionaire Warren Buffet says, "when I get the tax cuts, I just put the money in the bank, and the money just sits there, and it does no good."
    Of course! Largely because there's little motivation to invest the money in an environment with people bitch about corporate taxes, or further penalize them for investing by increasing capital gains taxes. The more it cost to invest, the more incentive there is to look for ways around the system--whether you're lower-middle class just putting a few hundred $ away every month, a plumber trying to start a small business, or a multi-millionaire.

    --
    Perhaps one day all money will be replaced with electronic money and for every pound or dollar they could assign a unique identification number that's tacked on a central database and stored alongside an id number for the currect owner
    Eventually that could be true, but with banks and credit card companies wanting to increase charges for electronic transfers of anykind, they are stalling the transition from cash.

    I believe you are most likely correct, about the (basis) of your economic beliefs. But your economic beliefs do not make any sense in the USA economy.
    Your beliefs fully protect and nurture large corporations. And at the same time they attack and destroy small businesses.

    Today in America small and family owned businesses create 65%-99% of Americas new jobs. And some say large corporations create 0% of Americas new jobs, because of foreign outsourcing.


    Small businesses in America, are forced to pay over 30% of their businesses income in federal taxes.
    While large corporations like GE pay 0% of their income in federal taxes, plus they each get billions of dollars, in federal tax refund/welfare/rebates each year.

    Also when a plumber starts a small business, it is not the same thing as when a millionaire CEO starts a new business. That plumber has to finance the building of their new business all by themselves. But when large corporations like Walmart, energy companies, or drug companies builds a new business/store, they get millions of dollars, from state and federal government sources, to help pay for the building costs.

    It makes no sense b/c small businesses have paid their workers, more money per hour, than places like Walmart. And small business has had more of their workers with health insurance than places like Walmart. And places like Walmart have also destroyed lots of US manufacturing jobs.


    And there are also other differences, when a plumber starts a small business, compared to when a millionaire CEO starts a new business.
    When that plumber starts a new business, they have to pay over 30% of their personal income in taxes. But the corporate CEO pays 0%-17% of their personal income in taxes.



    Why do Americans help and nurture large corporations and their CEO's, when its small and family owned businesses, that are currently the best thing for America? Because so many Americans believe in the propaganda lies, said by the millionaire CEO's corporate think tanks.
    Last edited by chad; August 4th, 2012 at 01:40 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    I believe you are most likely correct, about the (basis) of your economic beliefs. But your economic beliefs do not make any sense in the USA economy.
    Your beliefs fully protect and nurture large corporations. And at the same time they attack and destroy small businesses.

    Today in America small and family owned businesses create 65%-99% of Americas new jobs. And some say large corporations create 0% of Americas new jobs, because of foreign outsourcing.
    "Firms with at least 500 workers make up the majority of employment in the U.S., and much of the large swings in employment are due to large firms. This is especially true during the current recovery period. Between March 2010 and March 2011, employment grew by just under two million jobs. Large firms accounted for 56% of these gains, while firms with less than 50 workers accounted for only 17% of these gains."
    Do Small Businesses Deserve Their Reputation as Job Creators? - WSJ.com

    It's actually a pretty good article because it paints a more realistic and complex picture than "small" versus "large," discussing the differences between young and small, how small firms often destroy jobs by innovation as well as the tidbit I posted.

    Many states and communities, at least the smart ones, offer big incentives for small and new businesses. I marveled in Vermont a couple decades ago who the liberal fought tooth and nail against big breaks for businesses, but once the they were override and the state tax rates nearly dropped to zero the economy boomed like never before--Burlington is still a thriving meca for tech companies as a result two decades later. Corporates taxes should be zero--small and large; we can and should make up the differences in reduces spending and increases to non-investment income.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    To Lynx_Fox,


    In the first quarter of 2011 there were 300,000 net new jobs, and 85 percent were created by small businesses, according to BLS data.

    I think your above listed source may be corporate backed, and trying to hide these above facts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    To Lynx_Fox,


    In the first quarter of 2011 there were 300,000 net new jobs, and 85 percent were created by small businesses, according to BLS data.

    I think your above listed source may be corporate backed, and trying to hide these above facts.
    Cite your reference like I did instead of accusing the source of something you think taited his statement....

    Here's another study from US Census bureau economist that shows much the same thing as his statement, business type and age have MUCH more to do with creating jobs than business size.
    " They found that the relationship between firm size and employment growth is sensitive to these issues. However, their main finding wass that once they controlled for firm age there is no systematic relationship between firm size and growth. The findings highlight the important role of business startups and young businesses in U.S. job creation. Business startups contribute substantially to both gross and net job creation. In addition, they found an “up or out” dynamic of young firms. These findings imply that it is critical to control for and understand the role of firm age in explaining U.S. job creation, the authors said."
    Job creation linked to company age, not size — Maryland Population Research Center

    And I'm sure your experience includes the many examples of small business that don't create jobs---the thousands of mom business that choose never to hire anyone; another good one is Bain Capital, another small business, which seems to have had a dramatically negative effect on national job creation etc.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    I've justgot to say something in this debate. I'm not untrained in economics, but because I'm not on the ground in America, and America is a special case because of External Affairs Policy, has a large lower middle class and a largist upper poor class, America is in deep shit. That's economically speaking.And rolling the Presses to print money to keep Foreign Policy in place( this is now no longer possible for the United States, as will be bourne out in the short term), the local economy is a small part in the real thinking of Big Corporations. Why? Their money is mostly safe. Investment stragedy by highly paid CEOS make sure of that. Mainly World Economies are more important in the safe guarding of Wealth. So back to the Plumber Economy. It is my belief this bread and water policy by your Federal Government will increasingly come into focus in the immediate years ahead. Overseas Policy and expenditure will be cut back. New Power problems by Third World Countries Flexing their muscles will be ignored by America. And not before time. The Home Front Problems cannot be fixed overnight. As I see it taxation of non performing Capital is a priority. Taxation rates on sleeping money to be around 70%. If the Capitalist Class are not prepared to come to the party bring in a Government, by the People for the People, who will ensure this happens. There's nothing wrong in having some socialism washing through the Economy. England did it after both Wars, escpecially after the second World War. The Problem of dealing with Socialist Philosophy in America stems from the Declaration of Independance. The American Charter of free Will to the People, which of course is an illusion. Clutching the Flag with hand on Heart you will give your Lives so that the Power Brokers and Capitalists can continue to exist. Think about it. Freedom is a great thing to have in all its forms, if you have it. So freedom needs to be redefined in America, and another Declaration made. Yes, we will continue to have tea and toast and drive a five year old car, but fix up the infrastructure for National Health, encourage fitness programmes in all collective assemblies at all levels, and have a stronger programme for protecting Natural Resources, Drinking Water, and Food Production. I could go on--and on--. I,ve been around for a long time, I've been a student of World Economies as they have operated throughout History, and the one to fear is the Slave/master economy. westwind.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    American billionaire Warren Buffet says, "when I get the tax cuts, I just put the money in the bank, and the money just sits there, and it does no good."

    Of course! Largely because there's little motivation to invest the money in an environment with people bitch about corporate taxes, or further penalize them for investing by increasing capital gains taxes.
    You have to get yourself out of that talk radio Fox News la la land. You keep listening to those idiots, your brain will turn to mush.

    That's not why Buffet doesn't invest, or any other rich guy, or any other guy at all actually. They will invest whenever they can turn a buck, regardless of the capital gains tax rate or any "environment" of bitching from the little people, and the primary variable is demand for the product or service. If there is demand, money to be made, investors will line up. They will complain about the taxes, but the taxes are on the profits. When the rich have piled up all the money in offshore accounts, and the rest have no way to pay for stuff, demand shrinks, investments don't pay off - and the money stays in the pile, or bids against other piles for status symbols. This is entry level stuff, familiar for as long as there has been money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    If I watches or listened to Fox News I'd have a clue what you're talking about.

    If you ever referenced your hallow assertions--that might help as well.

    --
    But is $21 trillion actually something to really be worried about? The US economic worth is ~200 trillion, so even if all the hidden wealth is by Americans, it's still only 10%. It's even smaller when counted against the global worth, which is really what we should be comparing to. A ninety % effective money being counted and not sheltered is pretty darn good. The poor get to shelter a good % of money as well---I did it working odd jobs as a teenagers, like many still do by cash and barter things or projects.

    (http://rutledgecapital.com/2009/05/2...llion-134xgdp/)
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    To Lynx_Fox,


    In the first quarter of 2011 there were 300,000 net new jobs, and 85 percent were created by small businesses, according to BLS data.

    I think your above listed source may be corporate backed, and trying to hide these above facts.
    Cite your reference like I did instead of accusing the source of something you think taited his statement....

    Here's another study from US Census bureau economist that shows much the same thing as his statement, business type and age have MUCH more to do with creating jobs than business size.
    " They found that the relationship between firm size and employment growth is sensitive to these issues. However, their main finding wass that once they controlled for firm age there is no systematic relationship between firm size and growth. The findings highlight the important role of business startups and young businesses in U.S. job creation. Business startups contribute substantially to both gross and net job creation. In addition, they found an “up or out” dynamic of young firms. These findings imply that it is critical to control for and understand the role of firm age in explaining U.S. job creation, the authors said."
    Job creation linked to company age, not size — Maryland Population Research Center

    And I'm sure your experience includes the many examples of small business that don't create jobs---the thousands of mom business that choose never to hire anyone; another good one is Bain Capital, another small business, which seems to have had a dramatically negative effect on national job creation etc.




    All trusted figures show that small business creates 70%-85% of Americas new jobs. The following are a few links.

    PolitiFact Virginia | Cantor says small businesses create 70 percent of U.S. jobs

    Small Businesses Create Big Economies - Memphis Daily News



    And small business employs 50%- 84% of all working Americans. And since large companies, are moving any job they can to Chaina and India, the figures will continue to go up.

    How Many Jobs Do Small Employers Create? - Businessweek

    Frequently Asked Questions

    PolitiFact Virginia | Cantor says small businesses create 70 percent of U.S. jobs



    But you dont have to look at any source to realize these things, you can just use common sense.

    Look at "Dell", a large American computer company as an example. I just looked under my Dell computer, and it says made in Asia. This large American company creates its manufacturing jobs in Asia, not America. How does this large US company create American jobs?


    Heres some other examples, of large American companies.

    1.) Exxon mobil- My friends father is almost a CEO for oil companies, he told his account son not to try to get a job at Exxon, because Exxon wants to hire accounts in India to get cheaper labor. How does Exxon having their accountants in India help America?

    2.)Walmart- They are responsible for eliminating many manufacturing jobs, because they literally had so much buying power they forced companies to move jobs to China, so they could get cheaper products. Walmart also killed small businesses around all their stores, and these small businesses paid their workers, more money per hour than Walmart does. How did this large company help America?


    When I was 18 I had a TV set that was made in America, but today I cant find a TV set that was made in America. The reason why is these large US TV companies moved all their manufacturing jobs to Asia. How did these large companies help America by moving all their jobs to Asia?



    I just showed in simple terms, how large US companies like Walmart, kill and take away high paying US jobs.
    I also just showed in simple terms, how large US companies are creating their jobs in China and India.

    Can you show in simple terms, how large companies are creating American jobs?



    All of your sources are corporate backed propaganda. You listed a source from "Wall street."

    Do you realize that Wall Street is fighting to privatize Americas Social Security system?
    Do you realize if Wall Street wins their fight to privatize SS, they will take $750 billion dollars of our Social Security money, in their fees?
    Do you realize that other countries that privatized SS, saw their workers get way less money in SS payments?


    Can we trust a source, that is trying to take/steal $750 billion dollars from Americas senior citizens?




    Have a nice day/night, and take care of yourself,
    Chad.
    Last edited by chad; August 4th, 2012 at 04:08 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    If I watches or listened to Fox News I'd have a clue what you're talking about.

    If you ever referenced your hallow assertions--that might help as well.

    --
    But is $21 trillion actually something to really be worried about? The US economic worth is ~200 trillion, so even if all the hidden wealth is by Americans, it's still only 10%. It's even smaller when counted against the global worth, which is really what we should be comparing to. A ninety % effective money being counted and not sheltered is pretty darn good. The poor get to shelter a good % of money as well---I did it working odd jobs as a teenagers, like many still do by cash and barter things or projects.

    (Total Assets of the U.S. Economy $188 Trillion, 13.4xGDP : rutledgecapital.com)


    You said above, "If I watched or listened to Fox News I'd have a clue what you're talking about."

    But you do get your information from Fox news. The author of your source "Total Assets of the U.S. Economy $188 Trillion, 13.4xGDP : rutledgecapital.com" is a worker from Fox news.

    Your source was written by Dr. John Rutledge. Rutledge appears weekly on Fox News' Saturday morning business shows Forbes on Fox.

    The following 2 sources, show most of what I say about Dr. John Rutledge.
    John Rutledge (economist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Dr. John Rutledge : rutledgecapital.com



    The traditions of Research Science look at a sources past work and credibility. Let us look at Dr. John Rutledge.

    Dr. John Rutledge's "trickle down economics" work states, "tax cuts increase government revenues."
    While all 100% of respected economists state, "tax cuts do not increase government revenues." In the science of economics, Dr. John Rutledge is a "crackpot." This man states economic beliefs, that 100% of the respected economic community says, are not true.



    Research science also looks into sources, to see if there is a conflict of interest.

    Dr. John Rutledge's personal income is controlled, by the very businesses we are talking about.
    Dr. John Rutledge's personal income is controlled by venture capital and hedge funds. This is an un-thinkable conflict of interests. In any real scientific group his data would be the very last to be trusted, or used on this subject.


    Dr. John Rutledge is involved in venture capital.

    From Wiki,
    Venture capital (VC) is financial capital provided to early-stage, high-potential, high risk, growth startup companies. The venture capital fund makes money by owning equity in the companies it invests in, which usually have a novel technology or business model in high technology industries, such as biotechnology, IT, software, etc. The typical venture capital investment occurs after the seed funding round as growth funding round (also referred to as Series A round) in the interest of generating a return through an eventual realization event, such as an IPO or trade sale of the company. Venture capital is a subset of private equity. Therefore, all venture capital is private equity, but not all private equity is venture capital.[1]


    Dr. John Rutledge's personal income is controlled by the very creation of small/large businesses. People in a conflict of interest like this, sometimes adjust their data or (philosophies), to make the business, that controls their income look good.

    And Dr. Rutledge also has an active lecture (practice), he gives talks on global economics, capital flows, financial markets, investment strategies, the impact of technology on the economy, and strategies for owning and growing the value of a business. His personal income is also controlled by all these things as well.


    On a personal note:
    At this moment I personally believe, that many of the sources you gravitate to, in matters of economics, organic farming, solar power ex.ex. are fully connected to groups like Fox news, or their partners. And US scientists say that Fox news is a form of propaganda.

    This propaganda tries to lower taxes on large corporations, lower taxes on Americas rich, end business regulations for large corporations, ex.ex.ex.
    Last edited by chad; August 4th, 2012 at 03:57 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Well you certainly spent a lot of time attempting an ad hominom about a post by a man doing not much more than reciting the federal reserve numbers. Surprised you missed that :-)

    I rarely watch Fox News, and don't care for them when I do. As I've mentioned in other threads though, they follow opinions, impressions and to a large degree some broad principles about individual independence well established long before they were even a media idea--even as old as our great nation.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    To Lynx_Fox,


    In the first quarter of 2011 there were 300,000 net new jobs, and 85 percent were created by small businesses, according to BLS data.

    I think your above listed source may be corporate backed, and trying to hide these above facts.
    Cite your reference like I did instead of accusing the source of something you think taited his statement....

    Here's another study from US Census bureau economist that shows much the same thing as his statement, business type and age have MUCH more to do with creating jobs than business size.
    " They found that the relationship between firm size and employment growth is sensitive to these issues. However, their main finding wass that once they controlled for firm age there is no systematic relationship between firm size and growth. The findings highlight the important role of business startups and young businesses in U.S. job creation. Business startups contribute substantially to both gross and net job creation. In addition, they found an “up or out” dynamic of young firms. These findings imply that it is critical to control for and understand the role of firm age in explaining U.S. job creation, the authors said."
    Job creation linked to company age, not size — Maryland Population Research Center

    And I'm sure your experience includes the many examples of small business that don't create jobs---the thousands of mom business that choose never to hire anyone; another good one is Bain Capital, another small business, which seems to have had a dramatically negative effect on national job creation etc.



    Your link is presently not working, and it can not show a single figure. When you click to try to access "Who Creates Jobs ? Small vs. Large vs. Young (PDF)" it goes to a broken link. I had to view the source by online searching.


    It was written by John Haltiwanger. He can not be easily dis-credited like your other sources, but its possible this is because of him, not being popular and well known.
    But at this moment I can (not) dis-credit his work.


    But from what I read about him, I find him to be only 1/2 informed, in this threads subject.

    The things that bother me is, John Haltiwanger appears to leave out many variables, in his small vs. large business data. And he only seems to attack small business, while not attacking large businesses in anyway.

    1.) He appears to hide data about small businesses true importance.
    2.) He appears to not account for past or future outsourcing in his data.
    3.) His work appears to mention nothing negative about large corporations. (Like their 0% tax rates, or huge welfare tax rebate checks.) But at the same time he attacks small business.
    4.) He appears to mention nothing about US deficits or debt, making me believe he is only 1/2 informed about the real America.


    Perhaps John Haltiwanger is honest, and on to something important. But his business age ideas, seem be too young and early, to provide any solutions, or ideas for this threads topics.
    I believe his ideas are not mature enough, to be brought into real economics use.





    But when I stopped reading his paper I thought this, his work gives you the idea that (small business is worthless). But then I thought about how many people I know personally, that have jobs in/or created by small business, or a company with less than 500 workers.

    It seems that most? of my family and close friends, work in businesses with less than 500 workers.


    How can small business be worthless, when it appears to employ most of my family and close friends?

    I will be highly suspicious of any source, that has titles or themes, that are negative about small business.


    When I think about everyone I know, and whether they work in a company with less than 500 workers, it appears to go along with the sources I listed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Well you certainly spent a lot of time attempting an ad hominom about a post by a man doing not much more than reciting the federal reserve numbers. Surprised you missed that :-)

    I rarely watch Fox News, and don't care for them when I do. As I've mentioned in other threads though, they follow opinions, impressions and to a large degree some broad principles about individual independence well established long before they were even a media idea--even as old as our great nation.


    And I am very, very, very, very, very, very, very surprised that you missed those listed traditions of research science.

    Have a good one,
    Chad.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    And I am very, very, very, very, very, very, very surprised that you missed those listed traditions of research science.

    Have a good one,
    Chad.
    So you don't believe anything from someone you don't trust, even if what they say comes from a credible source which they boldly indicate, even including the table and reference?
    Or do you distrust the Federal reserve numbers?

    Or do you not see the tom foolery in the original piece which tries to compare "hidden" money with only years GDP numbers, instead of looking at the whole?
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    If I watches or listened to Fox News I'd have a clue what you're talking about.
    I never accused you of knowing where your notions came from. There are very few sources for the idea that the prospect of paying capital gains tax discourages investment of piles of cash in profitable business. Warren Buffet is not one of them. Rush Limbaugh is.

    Quote Originally Posted by lynx
    If you ever referenced your hallow assertions--that might help as well.
    Trolling again. You haven't referenced your sillyass claims above - and they need a reference, since to ordinary reason and familiarity with life they appear crazy. I'm jsut pointing out the sky is blue, and capitalism is based on meeting demand and taking a profit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx
    As I've mentioned in other threads though, they follow opinions, impressions and to a large degree some broad principles about individual independence well established long before they were even a media idea
    No they don't. They have no broad principles, no interest in individual independence, and they follow the whims and contingent needs of their neo-Confederate political arm and its corporate paymasters. They got going about 1974, '75, early stages with Jude Wanniski and Leo Strauss and Milton Friedman and the boys, and started taking over US politics with Reagan's campaign in 1980.

    They're fascists, and you're a dupe. And if you need a reference for that, reread the stuff you posted about "penalizing" via capital gains taxes, or the discouraging effect on Warren Buffet of people complaining about corporate taxes. That's not traditional principles of America, that's wingnut bs from Rupert Murdoch's cosseted little cadre of propagandists. It's right up there with your complaints about what has happened to the Republican Party recently - like it hasn't been what it is now for your entire adult life.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    broad principles about individual independence well established long before they were even a media idea
    Those principles are pretty basic.
    My money is my money...and whether I'm running a lemonade stand or running a huge corporation, if I take the risk and get some return on investment, then since I'm the one with skin in the game, that to is my money. If I can make more profit by putting it overseas because of unfavorable tax structures in my own nation or state--well that should be my decision as well. Though as a good citizen I'll try to make things better in my own country/state/community by changing the tax codes--after all I'd prefer to employ local if it doesn't' hurt my bottom line.

    If the government feels compelled to exercise its constitutional rights to tax me, than it should be for pretty darn good reasons, preferable reasons that lift all our boats, not ones that go to individuals not doing their best, or creating cultures of dependence, or worse, as the department of agriculture is doing (damn them) trying to break down the culture of independence (e.g. their campaign on "mountain pride" where folks refuse to take government food assistance.)

    Is there a rich heritage of this? Yes! We had an revolution over it. Most of our history practiced it; heck we didn't have income tax until just before WWI (a good reason for war), nor was it over 12.5% until the liberal government-dependence programs of the 1930s. The culture of independence was certainly alive in the 1970s, when most of my town including my folks adamantly refused individual assistance after a bad storm destroyed most of towns fishing gear, but welcomed the State's offer to rebuild the pier which would help many. My views were somewhat modeled after the republican state representative I sometimes did volunteer work for. Tax money if for the common good--not for individuals unless they are truly desperate--not just inconvenienced or trying to preserve a living beyond their means after they failed to plan for a rainy day.

    I don't watch Fox News very often (like most conservatives I'd guess), but their views tend to reflect that view on independence and fostering the culture that keeps people independent. (A lot of other Fox stuff pisses me off to no end).
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; August 5th, 2012 at 05:13 AM.
    gonzales56 likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chad View Post
    And I am very, very, very, very, very, very, very surprised that you missed those listed traditions of research science.

    Have a good one,
    Chad.
    So you don't believe anything from someone you don't trust, even if what they say comes from a credible source which they boldly indicate, even including the table and reference?
    Or do you distrust the Federal reserve numbers?

    Or do you not see the tom foolery in the original piece which tries to compare "hidden" money with only years GDP numbers, instead of looking at the whole?

    This is a forum of science, and science has long standing traditions.
    Some of these traditions are studying sources, discrediting sources, and also studying a authors previous work (to look for conflicts of interest).
    A major part of science is dismissing sources. And the traditions of science dismiss sources, were there is a conflict of interests.

    Conflict of interests cause lies, false data, false philosophies, and important data to be omitted.


    The following link explains some of these things.

    Responsible Conduct Research : Conflicts of Interest
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 18th, 2010, 04:10 PM
  2. 第三届计算
    By davezjh in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 19th, 2010, 02:12 AM
  3. 2008 信息技术&#1
    By julie_yh in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 25th, 2008, 02:50 AM
  4. Why is everyone hiding? Peek a boo, I see you.
    By Cottontop3000 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 11th, 2005, 04:12 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •