2021 - Is inflation finally back in the conversation?

[Fudge Nuggets 19152]

22 hours ago, Cheeseweasel said:

My ROI from my tax spending sucks.

Agreed.  We spend $800 bln per year on blowing up shit and haven’t won a war in 30 years.  

Edited May 13, 2023 by Fudge Nuggets

[Snake Diggity 4614]

@fattyflattieeverything you’ve said in this thread during the last 2 pages is stupid as fuck and I’m embarrassed for you.  Is there any way you can not post on this thread anymore?

[Fudge Nuggets 19152]

Fatty won’t be happy until we round up all the poors and exterminate them.

[52-80 19105]

9 hours ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

There are plenty of examples of where social programs (roads, education, etc.) Actually make it easier for everybody to live and succeed,

Doing our best to educate them goes a long way towards making society as whole more successful.

What of the roads and education are insufficient now.
 

What things, in specific terms, would you do with extra money to make things better?

[Hefeweizen 5307]

11 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

@fattyflattieeverything you’ve said in this thread during the last 2 pages is stupid as fuck and I’m embarrassed for you.  Is there any way you can not post on this thread anymore?

You could do what a lot of fine people have done, which is block him.  A big burly man came up to me with tears in his eyes saying he’s never been as proud as this.

[Snake Diggity 4614]

5 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

You could do what a lot of fine people have done, which is block him.  A big burly man came up to me with tears in his eyes saying he’s never been as proud as this.

I ignore a shitload of people and have had him on ignore in the past, but inevitably any thread he posts on then turns into pages of ignored comments with no actual content.  It’s annoying as fuck.

Fatty in the fishing thread is solid.  Fatty in the gun nut thread is fine, although I don’t go in there.  Fatty in CR is stupid as fuck, but the CR is a place where you’re kind of expecting to have to read through a bunch of stupid embarrassing shit, so he’s not alone.  But this thread (at some points) has held some quality discussion and it’s annoying as fuck to have him wade in here and force me to click thru his absolute stupidity.

Edited May 13, 2023 by Snake Diggity

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

@fattyflattieeverything you’ve said in this thread during the last 2 pages is stupid as fuck and I’m embarrassed for you.  Is there any way you can not post on this thread anymore?

That’s going to be a negative. Please don’t cry for me, Argentina. You’re more than welcome to be happy about overly supporting the takers.  I’ll continue to hope that one day they can get their shit together and actually contribute to society. 

[Brisketexan 104728]

That’s going to be a negative. Please don’t cry for me, Argentina. You’re more than welcome to be happy about overly supporting the takers.  I’ll continue to hope that one day they can get their shit together and actually contribute to society. 

The fact that after this many years on the site, with a jillion citations to sources explaining it, you still don’t get how richer people yield VASTLY greater benefits from gov’t funded services and infrastructure, just lows me the fuck away. Shit, you cited to Jeff Brzoska, saying he uses the roads the same as Poor Boy Joe. That’s so insanely false, I don’t understand how you can even say it.

Bezos made/makes his fortune via…a retail enterprise that is perhaps the single biggest user of America’s transportation infrastructure. Literally thousands of Amazon delivery vehicles a day benefit from our taxpayer funded roads. If Bezos makes 10 cents per item delivered…that’s dependent on taxpayer funded roads. Without them, his business wouldn’t work. But wait, there’s more - he also ships a lot of stuff by air. America’s air transport network is the envy of the world. Taxpayer funded FAA, taxpayer subsidized and supported airports and airport improvement projects.
Do you think Amazon ever ends up in litigation? 1000x more than any single poor guy. The courts that he uses to his advantage? Taxpayer subsidized.
He pays his employees shit wages. How can he get away with that? Because tax dollars make up the difference (yep, there are Amazon workers on govt assistance). Every dollar he doesn’t pay them (and the taxpayers do) is a dollar in his pocket.
Shit, I don’t make a fraction of Bezos money, yet I know that I - directly and indirectly - yield incredible benefits from our govt services and infrastructure (eg, I make money by hiring educated people to perform work, and I get a cut of what they bill - thanks, public education system; I utilize the taxpayer subsidized courts every day, etc).
Take away the things that taxes pay for, and Bezos is worth a crapload less. Me too. And you too. That you only consider actual direct govt payments makes you look really, really dumb. Yet I know you’re not. Which says something even worse: that you willfully ignore the truth

[fattyflattie 4636]

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Bezos made/makes his fortune via…a retail enterprise that is perhaps the single biggest user of America’s transportation infrastructure. Literally thousands of Amazon delivery vehicles a day benefit from our taxpayer funded roads.

Is it your contention they don’t register those vehicles, and pay tax on their gasoline, like you and me?  The same exact way we pay for our roads?  The same way the guy with a landscaping trailer tied to his truck does?  Or Swift or Schneider? Are you upset he pays for 10000 vans registration and the fuel that fuels them?  I don’t understand. 
 

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Do you think Amazon ever ends up in litigation? 1000x more than any single poor guy. The courts that he uses to his advantage? Taxpayer subsidized.

How much civil litigation are people under the pay-in threshold getting big involved in?  Criminal, I’d suppose a lot.  I guess this is a middle class example?  I’m pretty sure the middle class getting fucked was the entirety of my frustration.  
 

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

He pays his employees shit wages. How can he get away with that? Because tax dollars make up the difference (yep, there are Amazon workers on govt assistance). Every dollar he doesn’t pay them (and the taxpayers do) is a dollar in his pocket.

I obviously have no argument for this. But don’t look now, it isn’t just bezos.  It’s every business owner (from Joe the plumber to Patel the no tell motel owner to your lawn guy).  Feel like demonizing them?  I’m sure somehow it’s different to you.  
 

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Take away the things that taxes pay for, and Bezos is worth a crapload less. Me too. And you too. That you only consider actual direct govt payments makes you look really, really dumb. Yet I know you’re not. Which says something even worse: that you willfully ignore the truth

No one is talking about taking taxes away, quite the contrary.   All I see is a bunch of people realizing they’ve made it to their comfort level, realize they’ll never have that next step up, and are calling foul on those that made it.  “Theres no reason a human should ever have xxxxxxxx$”.   Think about a homeless persons view of that, but how their number is probably 100k.   Still agree?  Probably. No one here is ever incorrect.  
 

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Fatty won’t be happy until we round up all the poors and exterminate them.

This is dumb. I actually wish they’d get it together and come join the rest of polite society.  Especially rich from you, as you’ve spent your career removing oil from under the poorest feet in the world.  
 

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Are you worth 10’s of millions?  What’s the name of your TikToc channel?

Libsoftiktok

 

 

[Snake Diggity 4614]

Wtf does all this stupid ass “poor people suck, rich people are awesome” shit have to do with inflation again?

[Eastwood 4394]

4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That’s rich

I always hated that argument. “They have access to the same resources as everyone else! Why are they so poor?” The answer is that it is systematic wealth and poverty. 
 

An analogy that I use for this has two 18 year olds. One grew up as a carpenter’s son and the other grew up without any exposure to carpentry. You take them to a workshop, give them all the same exact tools, materials, and working conditions. If you were to tell them “you have one week to build me a canoe. The one who can build the best canoe gets $250k for college,” who in the hell do you think is going to win that competition? The carpenter’s son is the odds-on favorite by a long shot. Sure, the other kid might win, but it would only be in absolute fluke scenarios. 99 times out of 100, the carpenter’s son wins that purely based on his exposure to carpentry growing up. 
 

The point is that mere exposure to households that have college graduates or hard working people or business owners sets a particular tone for a person as they go out into the world. So, what do we do with the people who grow up in abject poverty? The ones who grow up with a single parent on welfare? The ones who have deadbeat parents? Do we just toss them to the trash heap or do we give them an opportunity to compete with everyone that didn’t have to struggle growing up? 

The cynic in me says that the real answer is traced back to the haves and the have-nots. Those who have benefited from their institutional advantages don’t want to share. “I worked hard for this! Why do I need to help lazy poor people?” Well, you didn’t have to work as hard as that poor person would to get where you are. You had advantages that you can’t even perceive because they were so embedded in your upbringing. Something that is just every day for you would be absolutely life changing for a truly poor person. Take food security, for example. There are millions of children and teenagers that won’t know where their meals will come from over the summer. How in the world are they supposed to even think about their future when they don’t even know if they can eat in the present? 
 

There’s more than enough resources to go around. Progressive tax is one mechanism to spread those resources out. I’m not going to slap my paystub down on the table, but I do very well. I enjoy a lot of creature comforts and my kids enjoy a way better lifestyle than I did growing up. A flat tax would have me paying less, but I have no problems paying more with the hopes that the extra I pay will go towards bettering society. “Society grows great when old men plant trees knowing they will never enjoy their shade.” 

[Brisketexan 104728]

Libsoftiktok

 
 

You’re ALMOST getting it. Yes, Bezos pays those fees. The same ones that done cover the actual costs of roads. Just like filing fees don’t cover the costs of the court system. And YES, it applies to ALL business owners - that’s why I included myself in the discussion. Our yield rate on tax investment is much, much better than someone who just gets the direct benefits of a few thousand bucks in food stamps and housing subsidies.
We have leveraged this tax-funded society to extract INCREDIBLE benefits. Which is not wrong, or a bad thing. But it’s incredibly relevant when we discuss “paying our fair share.” Which you continue to ignore.

[Bozo_Casanova 26324]

3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

care to elaborate?  If it’s the same Bezos uses roads for his business more than others, I’ve already heard it.   Tell me the difference in govt services provided and used by the person making 20k and the guy making 500k.  

Are you kidding me? Having been both of those things and spending decades crossing the distance in between I am here to tell you that not only the tax code, but the entire infrastructure of American civilization tilted my way about the same time I was in a position to buy my own Rolex.

fatty I like you but GTFOH with this. 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[Mullet Free 40]

1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

Wtf does all this stupid ass “poor people suck, rich people are awesome” shit have to do with inflation again?

Taxes and deficits I guess. 
 

Tax rates will go up in the future. They have to in order to attempt to fund all our entitlements. It won’t be nearly enough though. 

[Surly Bevo 24705]

I'm not some rah-rah Government guy, but I fucking hate when people try to make the "benefitting from government" argument and simplify it down to "roads and social services".   I can't tell if the folks making that argument are being disingenuous or if they are just too stupid to contemplate how many places the government is interwoven into the fabric of things they benefit from.  

You are some 50something dude pulling a couple to three hundred K a year working a job in some industry that is heavily regulated and high barriers to entry make it tough for competition to enter your market place thereby making it easier for the company you work for to pay you what they pay you and not forcing you to sweat....yea you just benefitted financially from the work of the government.

You refinanced your mortgage in 2020 and got a sweet 2.5% interest rate, saving you 80 thousand dollars in interest over the life of your loan. Yea, when Covid hit and most of the private money in the market shit its pants and ran for the hills that was Fannie, Freddie, FHA, and their government mandate/implicit guarantee standing in there making that possible.  Unless you really think you get the rates you get because of just how fucking awesome you are.

I could go on and on, but the idea that one is only benefitting from the government by using the roads, or drawing social services etc is just so fucking bad. 

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Surly Bevo

[Incredulity 11564]

The magnanimous government trope always brings the lols

[Eastwood 4394]

13 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

I'm not some rah-rah Government guy, but I fucking hate when people try to make the "benefitting from government" argument and simplify it down to "roads and social services".   I can't tell if the folks making that argument are being disingenuous or if they are just too stupid to contemplate how many places the government is interwoven into the fabric of things they benefit from.  

You are some 50something dude pulling a couple to three hundred K a year working a job in some industry that is heavily regulated and high barriers to entry make it tough for competition to enter your market place thereby making it easier for the company you work for to pay you what they pay you and not forcing you to sweat....yea you just benefitted financially from the work of the government.

You refinanced your mortgage in 2020 and got a sweet 2.5% interest rate, saving you 40 thousand dollars in interest over the life of your loan. Yea, when Covid hit and most of the private money in the market shit its pants and ran for the hills that was Fannie, Freddie, FHA, and their government mandate/implicit guarantee standing in there making that possible.  Unless you really think you get the rates you get because of just how fucking awesome you are.

I could go on and on, but the idea that one is only benefitting from the government by using the roads, or drawing social services etc is just so fucking bad. 

 

Well, that and their argument ignores simple economics. They whine about people benefiting off of social services without "paying" but don't realize that the business that they own/pay them large salaries requires, to various degrees, a lower wage-earning populace that needs to use those roads to get to those jobs and use those services to subsidize their low wages that benefit those companies. The analogy of the renter down the street who pays $900 a month benefiting from the same services as the home owner the other side of the street, even though they don't pay property taxes, is ignoring that the person who owns the real estate that is being rented to... wait for it... earn a profit. So, take that gripe up with the owner of the rental, not the poor person renting it.

[jimmyjazz 45592]

. . . and the landlord on that $900 monthly property isn't paying the property tax, the renter is.

[Bozo_Casanova 26324]

20 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

The magnanimous government trope always brings the lols

Almost as funny as the game is rigged against the winners trope.

[52-80 19105]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Bezos made/makes his fortune via…a retail enterprise that is perhaps the single biggest user of America’s transportation infrastructure. Literally thousands of Amazon delivery vehicles a day benefit from our taxpayer funded roads. If Bezos makes 10 cents per item delivered…that’s dependent on taxpayer funded roads. Without them, his business wouldn’t work. But wait, there’s more - he also ships a lot of stuff by air. America’s air transport network is the envy of the world. Taxpayer funded FAA, taxpayer subsidized and supported airports and airport improvement projects.

Yet I know you’re not. Which says something even worse: that you willfully ignore the truth

You painted so well what seems to be Jefe Pesos’ unidirectional exploitation of human capital and shared infrastructure, is there anything at all that he does well that you can comment on?

That he supposedly pays people poorly….but he pays at all, directly, to over 1 million people he keeps employed, and pays payroll taxes for. The thousands of delivery trucks and planes occupying roads and airspace…he is a patron of, and they in turn pay road tolls and taxes and buy fuels and terminal fees.

His company collects gigantic amounts of revenue….against which it has to expend a gigantic amount of costs (going to employees, manufacturers, other peoples businesses). If it generates net profit, it pays taxes to govt. If it generates net losses, it receives a credit. Like any other businesses. Like individuals. 

Can you show me where your umbrage lies? What exactly and mechanically is wrong with that picture?

His personal wealth is a consequence of equity appreciation. The equity nobody forces people into, but that investors voluntarily pay for shares of, and in aggregate for them too have multiplied by like a gazillion fold. (And when it came into peoples retirement through market indexes, it helped them there too). 

Where is the cheating or unfairness? Or put differently, if you were emperor of the world, what would you change?

[52-80 19105]

For the record, i favor abolishing LTCG benefits; implementing wealth tax; and general simplification of tax codes that eliminates mang special deductions. But while we all pretty much play the game under the same rulebook…singling out individuals and companies for merely being *too successful* smacks of cheap class warfarism. Rich man bad!

 

also, isnt surly powered by AWS?

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Almost as funny as the game is rigged against the winners trope.

Which is almost as funny as the winners not earning it. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

6 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Where is the cheating or unfairness? Or put differently, if you were emperor of the world, what would you change?

Rich man bad.  

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 hour ago, Surly Bevo said:

I could go on and on, but the idea that one is only benefitting from the government by using the roads, or drawing social services etc is just so fucking bad. 

 

The argument is that everyone has access to those exact same benefits.  Everyone. Every. Single. Citizen. Fuck, many non citizens, too.  

Yet only a small sect of our population fund them.  Therein lies the rub. 

[52-80 19105]

1 hour ago, Surly Bevo said:

I could go on and on, but the idea that one is only benefitting from the government by using the roads, or drawing social services etc is just so fucking bad. 

Ye ole “you didnt build that” critique, which originated in defense of targeting just 1 specific class if people — the successful ones 

which is kinda funny because it could be asked…”why didnt you build it then”

[Surly Bevo 24705]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

The argument is that everyone has access to those exact same benefits.  

[Js1 85143]

Unequal access is still access

CHECKMATE

[Brisketexan 104728]

Ye ole “you didnt build that” critique, which originated in defense of targeting just 1 specific class if people — the successful ones 
which is kinda funny because it could be asked…”why didnt you build it then”

It’s not about “targeting” anyone. It’s about acknowledging that we live in a collective society. Some of us benefit from that a good deal more than others, and there’s a COMBINATION of reasons for that: hard work, innate talent, blind luck, the gifts/sacrifices of others, and the very structure of our systems. I’m successful, and every one of those is behind my success. Take ONE of them away, and the odds of me being successful go way down. If we the people have some control over one of them (the structures of our systems), and can use that to improve society as a whole (which is made up of individuals), we should. The myth of the great American individual, triumphing solely because of his own sweat, is worse than a myth - it’s a lie we tell to excuse us from providing anything to anyone.

I don’t resent the wealthy. Shit, per the math, I’m ONE OF THEM. I’m just honest enough to grasp that I’ve benefited greatly from the systems in place, and to whom much is given, much should be expected. I pay lots in taxes, I should probably pay more. I give a lot, in time and money. I should probably give more. I don’t resent paying taxes (even if I do think some expenditures are dumb as hell; there are plenty of others I think are underfunded).

I don’t think that Bezos is evil because he’s made money (I think he’s shitty in plenty of ways, but in the basic sense of “he developed and grew a very successful business,” I don’t resent him at all or want to “punish” him). I just know that he has benefited from a structure that disproportionately favors, supports, and rewards his actions over those of the little guy. Paying back into that system in a fair proportion is not an unreasonable ask.

[Guest]

Yeah, but defining fair is  evidently extremely impossible.

You have a better shot at getting the UT football jersey in the right shade of orange.

Edited May 13, 2023 by slorch

[52-80 19105]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The myth of the great American individual, triumphing solely because of his own sweat, is worse than a myth - it’s a lie we tell to excuse us from providing anything to anyone.

I don’t resent the wealthy. Shit, per the math, I’m ONE OF THEM. I’m just honest enough to grasp that I’ve benefited greatly from the systems in place, and to whom much is given, much should be expected.

I don’t think that Bezos is evil because he’s made money… Paying back into that system in a fair proportion is not an unreasonable ask.

Thats a straw man’ish mischaracterization of the Triumphant Individual claim, used to excuse people from their lack of success. Nobody claims every penny and ounce of a persons achievement is their exclusive doing in the vacuum of space….if their **relative** achievement came through our same environment, who are we to dismiss their merit?

You recognizing being a beneficiary of the “system in place” does not imply my, or others people, exclusion from that same system. 

I agree ultimately Bezos should definitely pay more. I’m asking you on what basis you think he should do that. What is the “fair proportion”?

 

[B00M 6280]

3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Are you kidding me? Having been both of those things and spending decades crossing the distance in between I am here to tell you that not only the tax code, but the entire infrastructure of American civilization tilted my way about the same time I was in a position to buy my own Rolex.

Maybe I’m the only one that doesn’t know your story, but can you expand on this a bit? Maybe some specific examples of what tilted when? Congrats!!!

[B00M 6280]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

It’s not about “targeting” anyone. It’s about acknowledging that we live in a collective society. Some of us benefit from that a good deal more than others, and there’s a COMBINATION of reasons for that: hard work, innate talent, blind luck, the gifts/sacrifices of others, and the very structure of our systems. I’m successful, and every one of those is behind my success. Take ONE of them away, and the odds of me being successful go way down. If we the people have some control over one of them (the structures of our systems), and can use that to improve society as a whole (which is made up of individuals), we should. The myth of the great American individual, triumphing solely because of his own sweat, is worse than a myth - it’s a lie we tell to excuse us from providing anything to anyone.

I don’t resent the wealthy. Shit, per the math, I’m ONE OF THEM. I’m just honest enough to grasp that I’ve benefited greatly from the systems in place, and to whom much is given, much should be expected. I pay lots in taxes, I should probably pay more. I give a lot, in time and money. I should probably give more. I don’t resent paying taxes (even if I do think some expenditures are dumb as hell; there are plenty of others I think are underfunded).

I don’t think that Bezos is evil because he’s made money (I think he’s shitty in plenty of ways, but in the basic sense of “he developed and grew a very successful business,” I don’t resent him at all or want to “punish” him). I just know that he has benefited from a structure that disproportionately favors, supports, and rewards his actions over those of the little guy. Paying back into that system in a fair proportion is not an unreasonable ask.

But by following the tax code, with its deductions and incentives and all, isn’t he paying into the system in a legally fair proportion? What specifically about the tax code needs to change? 

i sweater gawd so many of these discussions could be quick and legitimately productive if we could debate the actual laws rather than our feels

[Incredulity 11564]

27 minutes ago, B00M said:

But by following the tax code, with its deductions and incentives and all, isn’t he paying into the system in a legally fair proportion?

[Neonmoon 38127]

30 minutes ago, B00M said:

But by following the tax code, with its deductions and incentives and all, isn’t he paying into the system in a legally fair proportion? What specifically about the tax code needs to change? 

i sweater gawd so many of these discussions could be quick and legitimately productive if we could debate the actual laws rather than our feels

Agree, there are way too many deductions and incentives. The business use of home is hilariously abused by self employed people. Why do we have a child tax credit?  So many to cover 

[Brisketexan 104728]

But by following the tax code, with its deductions and incentives and all, isn’t he paying into the system in a legally fair proportion? What specifically about the tax code needs to change? 
i sweater gawd so many of these discussions could be quick and legitimately productive if we could debate the actual laws rather than our feels

Yes. He’s following the law.
And no, the tax code is not structured to have the richest, particularly the ultra-rich, pay in a fair proportion.

That’s the point. None of us are saying that Bezos is a tax cheat. We’re saying that the taxation system is structured poorly. That’s our entire point on the taxation issue.

How do we hit the PERFECT sweet spot with regard to a very complex system (economics, and how it relates to relative benefit from existing structures, costs, etc)? We don’t. But we should try to get closer to it than we are today, because we’re missing it rather wide.

[52-80 19105]

59 minutes ago, B00M said:

But by following the tax code, with its deductions and incentives and all, isn’t he paying into the system in a legally fair proportion? What specifically about the tax code needs to change? 

i sweater gawd so many of these discussions could be quick and legitimately productive if we could debate the actual laws rather than our feels

well i think hypothetically some e-tailing magnate could use roads to deliver goods for his business, so i propose these novel new methods of taxes to make it fair to all road users:

-tolls that charge per pass, so his trucks that drive more often have to pay more

-taxes on fuel, because they consume much more fuels than normal cars

-heavy vehicle use tax, because heavier trucks cause more road damage than passenger vehicles.  and there should be weighing stations to ensure its compliance.

-other freight taxes

please elect me to commissioner of IRS

[Bozo_Casanova 26324]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Which is almost as funny as the winners not earning it. 

Earning what? The right to the breaks?
One of my favorite people in my industry is a guy who has been the CMO/CRO of multiple successful startups. He typically declines a salary and works for equity until he can exit. He works his ass off. Even as a semi-retired adviser he puts in 50-60 hours a week, and he’s done extremely well.
When he’s not doing working he’s fucking around with his house on the James River near the bay. I cracked wise one time about needing that kind of exit, and he says “my best decision was being born rich.”

There’s no crime in good fortune. But people lucky enough to catch it should be grateful and knock off the whining. Lotta people work hard, but nobody “earns”  a stacked deck. 

1 hour ago, B00M said:

Maybe I’m the only one that doesn’t know your story, but can you expand on this a bit? Maybe some specific examples of what tilted when? Congrats!!!

I work hard and have been extremely lucky. It’s really not more complicated than that. If my luck runs out I’m toast*, as are we all. Act accordingly. Easy come, easy go. 
As for what changed, you start to notice all kinds of things, like your effective tax rate beginning to go down. 
But in general it’s a little less tangible, like making the move up the frequent flyer ladder on an airline. You get a lot of upgrades and more people call you sir.
 

 

 

 

*ironically, it might be

Edited May 13, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Agreed.  We spend $800 bln per year on blowing up shit and haven’t won a war in 30 years.  

Not totally true.

It’d be a difficult position to say the Iraqis won Deserts Storm/ Desert Shield.

Carry on with the Hate for America tour though.

My favorite is that relative world peace isn’t worth it though… or if we stood down, everyone else would miraculously behave.  The price is worth your fanciful notions.

Edited May 13, 2023 by slorch

[Snake Diggity 4614]

This thread is off topic like a motherfucker.

[Eastwood 4394]

9 minutes ago, slorch said:

 

Carry on with the Hate for America tour though.

Ah, the good ol’ “you hate America because you’re pointing out its flaws and saying we can do better as a society.”

We can, and should always strive to be, better. 

[Hefeweizen 5307]

[jimmyjazz 45592]

1 hour ago, Eastwood said:

Ah, the good ol’ “you hate America because you’re pointing out its flaws and saying we can do better as a society.”

We can, and should always strive to be, better. 

We're inching close to "if you don't love it, leave it".

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

This thread is off topic like a motherfucker.

How?  Tax policy plays into inflation controls. 

[Mullet Free 40]

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19152]

6 hours ago, slorch said:

It’d be a difficult position to say the Iraqis won Deserts Storm/ Desert Shield.

Yeah, that’s the point.  Desert Storm was just over 30 years ago.  Do they not teach math at Tech?

[Snake Diggity 4614]

If shit was “fair”, if the determining factors in financial success were simply hard work and ambition and intelligence, there would be no correlation between a person’s wealth as an adult and how much wealth their parents had when they were born.  People who advocate low taxes and few govt benefits think the playing field is level; that’s ridiculous.  

Our society is grossly inefficient with its human resources.  The potential we’ve wasted as a result of unchecked greed and fear is disgusting.

Theres a reason every major sports league has some form of a salary cap.  It’s because access to capital is a compounding advantage that cannot be made up in any other way.  Without severely restricting the wealthiest from running away from the pack, there’s no competition, just preordained winners and losers.

As it relates to tax policy, I’d be fine with a flat tax with no deductions of any kind, provided there was a massive tax on large estates (something like 90% on everything over $10,000,000).  As it stands we have a progressive tax structure the allows wealthy people to end up paying a lower effective tax rate than poor people.  That’s insane.

I think the amount we spend on education and healthcare is stupidly low.  I believe it would be pretty easy to balance our budget and fund the things I value without hurting the economy if we were able to keep politicians from being for sale, although I don’t know how that can change.

As it relates to the topic of this thread, I don’t think the majority of the inflation we have seen over the last 2-3 years can be attributed to government spending.  The last stimulus package that was passed in 2021 was unnecessary but the inflation we’ve seen has been more a result of supply shocks resulting from geopolitical instability and the pandemic than simply oversupply of dollars and too much govt spending.

[B00M 6280]

2 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

If shit was “fair”, if the determining factors in financial success were simply hard work and ambition and intelligence, there would be no correlation between a person’s wealth as an adult and how much wealth their parents had when they were born.  People who advocate low taxes and few govt benefits think the playing field is level; that’s ridiculous.  

Our society is grossly inefficient with its human resources.  The potential we’ve wasted as a result of unchecked greed and fear is disgusting.

Theres a reason every major sports league has some form of a salary cap.  It’s because access to capital is a compounding advantage that cannot be made up in any other way.  Without severely restricting the wealthiest from running away from the pack, there’s no competition, just preordained winners and losers.

As it relates to tax policy, I’d be fine with a flat tax with no deductions of any kind, provided there was a massive tax on large estates (something like 90% on everything over $10,000,000).  As it stands we have a progressive tax structure the allows wealthy people to end up paying a lower effective tax rate than poor people.  That’s insane.

I think the amount we spend on education and healthcare is stupidly low.  I believe it would be pretty easy to balance our budget and fund the things I value without hurting the economy if we were able to keep politicians from being for sale, although I don’t know how that can change.

As it relates to the topic of this thread, I don’t think the majority of the inflation we have seen over the last 2-3 years can be attributed to government spending.  The last stimulus package that was passed in 2021 was unnecessary but the inflation we’ve seen has been more a result of supply shocks resulting from geopolitical instability and the pandemic than simply oversupply of dollars and too much govt spending.

MLB laughs at your salary cap argument. 

I wager you’d have immense difficulty balancing the US budget while funding the things you care about without wrecking our economy. If it was going to happen, the time to try to balance our budget was when the Tea Party was a thing. With todays elevated interest rates, mandatory spending + Debt Payments = 100% of tax revenue. Every dollar toward discretionary spending is deficit spending. In other words, with a balanced federal budget, even if you spend $0 on US Defense, you have $0 for additional healthcare and education spending. Actually it’s even worse, you still need to find like $900B to cut. 

Without a massive technological break thru and productivity bump from something like AI, there will be extreme financial pain in our lifetimes. 
 

 

 

[Snake Diggity 4614]

4 minutes ago, B00M said:

MLB laughs at your salary cap argument. 

I wager you’d have immense difficulty balancing the US budget while funding the things you care about without wrecking our economy. If it was going to happen, the time to try to balance our budget was when the Tea Party was a thing. With todays elevated interest rates, mandatory spending + Debt Payments = 100% of tax revenue. Every dollar toward discretionary spending is deficit spending. In other words, with a balanced federal budget, even if you spend $0 on US Defense, you have $0 for additional healthcare and education spending. Actually it’s even worse, you still need to find like $900B to cut. 

Without a massive technological break thru and productivity bump from something like AI, there will be extreme financial pain in our lifetimes. 
 

 

 

MLB has imposed severe penalties for going over their competitive balance threshold.  It is a de facto salary cap.  On top of that, like all the other leagues, they have wealth redistribution in the form of the draft and international signing pools being structured in reverse order of record.  That’s kept the league somewhat competitive.  Despite that, it’s pretty clear that they need further restrictions on their wealthiest teams, since their hardest working, smartest organizations cannot win it all due to lack of capital (looking at Tampa Bay), while the dumbest teams still post winning records due to their ability to spend their way out of their stupidity.

 

You went further into the CR but I’ll respond; the Tea Party had no interest in balancing the budget.  They were the precursor to Trumpism and nothing more than the right wing’s reaction to a black man becoming president.  Talk of balanced budgets was bullshit.

The argument that the debt will have to be paid at high interest rates doesn’t make any sense.  If the debt is as crippling as you say to the economy, unemployment will go up which mean rates will go down which means the debt will be refinanced at lower rates.  The only way the debt gets paid at high rates is if we somehow pay it off without wrecking the economy.

[tbone_ 14027]

It’s possible to have a recession/shrinking economy and still have high rates.

[Snake Diggity 4614]

Just now, tbone_ said:

It’s possible to have a recession/shrinking economy and still have high rates.

Only if unemployment is low.  Hard to have the kind severe recession/depression being described by debt hawks without unemployment going up.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Snake Diggity