Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: It's The Economy, Stupid

  1. #1
    Cyburbian Emeritus Bear Up North's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Northwestern Ohio
    Posts
    9,327

    It's The Economy, Stupid

    I am assuming that most of you remember the phrase "It's the economy, stupid!", used by Bill Clinton's team when he ran for the presidency against George Herbert Walker Bush. The phrase is still accurate today.....just substitute the last word with "America" (or Greece or France or Italy, yadda). Our world economy seems pretty stagnant. The point of this thread? Your thoughts, concerns, rants, etc., concerning your/our economy.

    Double Dip?
    Some experts are giving the economy a 50/50 chance of going into a second recession. Hell, I didn't think we were out of the first recession. Another recession now would bring some real challenges to the economy. Many companies and organizations reduced their staffs to near "bare bones". In another recession, tailgating the one we just slipped out of, many of the long-time employed could face the pink slip devil.

    Cash Cows
    Many, many companies are loaded with cash. In 2009 and 2010 they made organizational changes and/or greatly improved productivity (automation, lean thinking, etc.). As better times came into the picture they still held off on large-scale hiring. Unlikely for this to change soon.

    Productivity
    Companies and organizations now do more with less. Labor-saving machinery and technology puts them in a position of strength with little-to-no new bodies gracing the desks, screens, and machines that keep the ecomony rumbling along.

    Help Wanted Signs
    I am convinced that unemployment is in for years of 9% to 12%. Certain industries will stay at the high end. Those millions of unemployed were once paying taxes (at all levels.....local, state, Federal).

    Net Worth
    Chances are that your net worth has slid. Maybe a lot of sliding. Our homes are worth less.....some folks, much less. 401Ks, pensions, annuities, etc. dropped so much in value that many boomers (me included) are forced to work longer. I know a number of people in my age group who planned to retire at the 62-65 range. They are now having second thoughts. One of the main reasons: their house was supposed to be sold at age 62-65 and the profit would pay for a long number of years of retirement.

    Good News?
    If you are in certain businesses you are doing well. Energy-related is certainly booming. Small nation-wide retail is doing well, such as Dollar Store, etc.
    _____

    Does this signal an end to the Obama presidency? If voting would just be based on the economy it would. But the Republican candidates, so far, are not exhibiting a strong sense of November, 2012 victory. And they are splintered between the old guard (sometimes called RINO) and the Tea Party faithful.

    IMO, many of the policies of the George W. Bush administration AND the policies of the Barack Obama administration put us in this mess. I just haven't figured out if it is just mud.....or quicksand.

    What say you?

    Bear
    Occupy Cyburbia!

  2. #2
    Cyburbian safege's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Golden Valley MN
    Posts
    716
    The more efficient capitalism = more unemployment = unused capital at the top = pressure to tax unused capital at a high rate = even more efficient capitalism, and so on.

    More and better capitalism begets more and better welfare coverage.

    The healthy body politic formula still works :

    Socialism is our muscular system. Democracy is our skeletal system. Capitalism is our Cardiovascular system. Regulation (case law) is our digestive system.
    Psychotics are consistently inconsistent. The essence of sanity is to be inconsistently inconsistent.
    -Larry Wall

  3. #3
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    11,202
    I think we are in for the long haul. I don't think our economy was broken by Obama, and I don't think it will be fixed by him either.

    Until we either make it viable for businesses to hire again or regulate/deregulate certain sectors to spur growth, we are going to be stuck at 2% growth and 9% unemployment (which is probably more like 13% or more if you add those who are no longer looking).

    I think the real X factor will be what the baby boomers do. Once they retired that would have caused one of the largest shifts in employment ever in the US. That might not happen for 10 years or more now, which will again only serve to stall a recovery.

    I don't think we have any chance of a double dip recession, but I think we will be sitting in a pretty hostile environment for job creation and GDP growth.

    Maybe we need a game changer.... Fair Tax anyone?
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  4. #4
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    I suppose I am the forum radical, but I believe that our government is now run by and for the super-rich. I don't think there is any interest on the part of politicians in either party to solve our underlying economic problems. Whether it is Obama, perry, Romney, or whoever in office will make no real difference IMO.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator kjel's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Wishing I were in Asia somewhere!
    Posts
    10,302
    Blog entries
    5
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    I suppose I am the forum radical, but I believe that our government is now run by and for the super-rich. I don't think there is any interest on the part of politicians in either party to solve our underlying economic problems. Whether it is Obama, perry, Romney, or whoever in office will make no real difference IMO.
    It sure as hell isn't run for our benefit. It's not just the Prez it's Congress as a whole.
    "He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?" Jeremiah 22:16

  6. #6
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,620
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    I suppose I am the forum radical, but I believe that our government is now run by and for the super-rich. I don't think there is any interest on the part of politicians in either party to solve our underlying economic problems. Whether it is Obama, perry, Romney, or whoever in office will make no real difference IMO.
    I don't know--you might be surprised by the number of people that agree with that statement regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. I'm certainly a believer that we are now served by government "of the rich, by the rich and for the rich."

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  7. #7
    Cyburbian ofos's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Slightly Off-Center
    Posts
    8,261
    Quote Originally posted by Suburb Repairman View post
    I'm certainly a believer that we are now served by government "of the rich, by the rich and for the rich."
    When has it ever been otherwise?
    “Death comes when memories of the past exceed the vision for the future.”

  8. #8
    Cyburbian safege's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Golden Valley MN
    Posts
    716
    I'm the optimist here ?

    We're in trouble.
    Psychotics are consistently inconsistent. The essence of sanity is to be inconsistently inconsistent.
    -Larry Wall

  9. #9
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In a new discovered reality where it doesn't snow
    Posts
    14,083
    It does not matter who we elect, the government has very little if any control on the economy beyond who they appoint for to chair the Federal Reserve, which is as “federal” as Federal Express.
    Trusting a DC politician with your money is like trusting a hungry dog with a raw steak.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian illinoisplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    The Fox Valley
    Posts
    4,979
    Blog entries
    1
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    I suppose I am the forum radical, but I believe that our government is now run by and for the super-rich. I don't think there is any interest on the part of politicians in either party to solve our underlying economic problems. Whether it is Obama, perry, Romney, or whoever in office will make no real difference IMO.
    I understand the anger towards the government, but I do have to question whether the government is actually run simply for the benefit of the rich when the rich pay way more taxes than anyone (both as a percentage and as a total dollar amount), when half the country doesn't even pay taxes (mostly poor and working class folks), and when "wealthy" businesses are taxed so much that they choose to do business elsewhere and/or cut their workforces.
    "Life's a journey, not a destination"
    -Steven Tyler

  11. #11
    Gunfighter Mastiff's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Middle of a Dusty Street
    Posts
    6,454
    Quote Originally posted by illinoisplanner View post
    I understand the anger towards the government, but I do have to question whether the government is actually run simply for the benefit of the rich when the rich pay way more taxes than anyone (both as a percentage and as a total dollar amount), when half the country doesn't even pay taxes (mostly poor and working class folks), and when "wealthy" businesses are taxed so much that they choose to do business elsewhere and/or cut their workforces.
    Those durned revenuers are runnin' off them bizinesses agin'!

    1. Bank of America took $336 billion in bailouts in 2009, but in 2010, flush with $4.4 billion in profits, it paid no taxes. Even Forbes magazine asked, how is that possible? Probably thanks to their 115 offshore tax havens.

    2. Boeing just received $35 billion from our government to build 179 airborne tankers, but despite nearly $10 billion in profits from 2008 to 2010, it too paid no taxes, again thanks to foreign tax havens.

    3. Citicorp took $476 billion from the bailout and then made monster profits in 2010, yet it paid no taxes, thanks to 427 subsidiaries in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong.

    4. Exxon/Mobil, received huge oil subsidies from the government and earned $45 billion in 2009 but paid no taxes, again thanks to stashing profits in places like the Bahamas and Singapore.

    5. GE – Well, we know all about this one...

    6. Google utilizes a technique that moves most of its income through Ireland and Netherlands to Bermuda, making its tax rate 2.3 percent.

    7. Mega Pharmaceuticals Merck earned $9 billion in profits and paid no taxes in 2010, while Pfizer (largest drug maker) owed $10 billion in taxes but found the necessary loopholes to pay no taxes, thanks to its offshore subsidiaries in places like Luxembourg and the Isle of Jersey.

    8. News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch’s media monolith that owns Fox News avoids paying American taxes through its 152 subsidiaries in tax havens from the British Virgin Islands to Hong Kong.

    9. Verizon, despite making $24.2 billion in pre-tax US income, paid no taxes and actually claimed a federal refund of $1.3 billion for the last two years, again all thanks to those offshore subsidiaries.

    10. Wells Fargo, the fourth largest bank in the US, which took $107 billion in bailouts, wrote off all its losses by acquiring Wachovia, thus paying no taxes. Yet its CEO earned $5.6 million in cash for his salary and $13 million in stock.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    C'mon and get me you twist of fate
    I'm standing right here Mr. Destiny
    If you want to talk well then I'll relate
    If you don't so what cause you don't scare me

  12. #12
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,593
    Quote Originally posted by illinoisplanner View post
    I understand the anger towards the government, but I do have to question whether the government is actually run simply for the benefit of the rich when the rich pay way more taxes than anyone (both as a percentage and as a total dollar amount), when half the country doesn't even pay taxes (mostly poor and working class folks), and when "wealthy" businesses are taxed so much that they choose to do business elsewhere and/or cut their workforces.
    Its more than just the tax system that is geared towards benefitting the rich, but just speaking on the tax issues its important to note that the half that "don't pay taxes" actually do pay taxes on payroll and sales and various other taxes, just not income. The fact that half of the citizens don't pay fed income tax is troubling - but to me it shows that half the country is making so little that they can barely afford to survive. I think the cutoff is somewhere around 16k a year where below that you don't have to pay fed income tax? That's not very much money at all. Also- I see the middle class or the new middle class (including those making up to 500k a year or so as the ones who really have the legitimate gripe. As mastiff is pointing out, the billionaires and top 1% of the top 1% are the ones who are in general not paying much at all in taxes. That's wrong.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  13. #13
    Gunfighter Mastiff's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Middle of a Dusty Street
    Posts
    6,454
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    I think the cutoff is somewhere around 16k a year where below that you don't have to pay fed income tax? That's not very much money at all.
    In 2011 it dropped back down to under $11,000, I do believe.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    C'mon and get me you twist of fate
    I'm standing right here Mr. Destiny
    If you want to talk well then I'll relate
    If you don't so what cause you don't scare me

  14. #14
    Cyburbian wahday's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    New Town
    Posts
    3,952
    Quote Originally posted by illinoisplanner View post
    I understand the anger towards the government, but I do have to question whether the government is actually run simply for the benefit of the rich when the rich pay way more taxes than anyone (both as a percentage and as a total dollar amount), when half the country doesn't even pay taxes (mostly poor and working class folks), and when "wealthy" businesses are taxed so much that they choose to do business elsewhere and/or cut their workforces.
    Ok, well the corporate tax rate in this country ranges from 15 percent to 35 percent. Same with personal income tax. Last year I was in the 25 percent bracket. So, the wealthiest person in America paid only ten percent more in taxes than I did. Of course that is more of a contributionm in terms of real dollars, but I make ALOT less than them and, if my basic math skills serve me, that is exactly the result I would expect.

    Despite this historically low rate, during this same period, the top tier earners have still increased their after-tax incomes at a faster rate than any other income group. They are not hurting and, in fact, they are continuing to increase their earnings while others see them diminish.

    To put things in some historical context, note that in 1980, the highest tax bracket was....70 percent! Now we're down to HALF of that. Between 1942 and 1964, the rate hovered at 90 percent!!. Yes, you read that correctly - 90 percent (sometimes even higher!) 1988-92 and prior to 1930 are the ONLY time periods when it has been lower than 35 percent.. Even during Reagan's presidency it was higher than it is now.

    I'm not sure you can create a clear causal effect between why businesses have moved operations out of the country or laid off workers and the tax rate. Especially in this current economic climate. The idea that business owners are wanting to hire more workers but juct can't because their ROI is too small is, I think, unfair. In this economy, employers are laying people off because they can't use them - they don't have enough demand for their product or services. No matter how much you lower the tax rate, people are not going to employ workers to just sit around. Builders won't build homes if no one is buying, for example.

    I think there are many reasons businesses move their operations out of the country beyond favorable tax rates (and if you tyhink we should be competing with tax rates in China or Mexico, I think those are not te best models to be emulating). There are environmental laws, minimum wage issues, safety costs that may not be a factor elsewhere, etc. Personally, these are not things I think we should be comprimising, though I realize there are some that do (rolling back the EPA regulations and all).

    Anyway, I wasn't clear whether you were lamenting the high tax rate or saying that the government is just serving the interests of the rich, helping them make more money because they are the principle supporters through tax revenue. Certainly there is some argument for that. Who benefitted more than others from the government building the railroads ro highway system? We all get some benefit, but especially in the turn of the century, it was the railroads that really raked in the dough. Thanks to that great government-built infrastructure (which they also helped pay for).
    The purpose of life is a life of purpose

  15. #15
    Cyburbian Brocktoon's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Promoting synergies...
    Posts
    3,602
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    It does not matter who we elect, the government has very little if any control on the economy beyond who they appoint for to chair the Federal Reserve, which is as “federal” as Federal Express.
    The federal government has a great amount of influence on the economy but less so on job creation. Approximately 15% of GDP is directly attributed to government spending. Furthermore the Federal government issues debt which is a major part of the world's financial market. Look at the local impact of a military base on a local economy. Lockheed Martin generates a huge part of its business from the Feds.
    In health care almost 50% of Americans ( and that number is pre Obamacare) came from government sources. This does not even count how federal regulation can create or destroy markets and thus impact the economy. Regardless of one's opinion of the Feds, they have a large role and impact on the overall economy.
    "You merely adopted the dark. I was born in it,..." -Bane

  16. #16
    Cyburbian safege's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Golden Valley MN
    Posts
    716
    The highest tax bracket ranged from 71% to 94%. Now it has ranged very little from 35%. It was cut in half in 1986, and no one has managed, as yet, to put it back. Tax estimates point to a stable economy, if we had not done this one thing wrong.

    BTW, a tax bracket of 94% does not mean a tax rate of 94%. It does mean that meaningful deductions can be made if business is willing to hire, train, and retain more workers than they actually need.

    But we don't say it that way, for obvious reasons.
    Psychotics are consistently inconsistent. The essence of sanity is to be inconsistently inconsistent.
    -Larry Wall

  17. #17
    Cyburbian illinoisplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    The Fox Valley
    Posts
    4,979
    Blog entries
    1
    Quote Originally posted by Mastiff View post
    Those durned revenuers are runnin' off them bizinesses agin'!

    1. Bank of America took $336 billion in bailouts in 2009, but in 2010, flush with $4.4 billion in profits, it paid no taxes. Even Forbes magazine asked, how is that possible? Probably thanks to their 115 offshore tax havens.

    2. Boeing just received $35 billion from our government to build 179 airborne tankers, but despite nearly $10 billion in profits from 2008 to 2010, it too paid no taxes, again thanks to foreign tax havens.

    3. Citicorp took $476 billion from the bailout and then made monster profits in 2010, yet it paid no taxes, thanks to 427 subsidiaries in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong.

    4. Exxon/Mobil, received huge oil subsidies from the government and earned $45 billion in 2009 but paid no taxes, again thanks to stashing profits in places like the Bahamas and Singapore.

    5. GE – Well, we know all about this one...

    6. Google utilizes a technique that moves most of its income through Ireland and Netherlands to Bermuda, making its tax rate 2.3 percent.

    7. Mega Pharmaceuticals Merck earned $9 billion in profits and paid no taxes in 2010, while Pfizer (largest drug maker) owed $10 billion in taxes but found the necessary loopholes to pay no taxes, thanks to its offshore subsidiaries in places like Luxembourg and the Isle of Jersey.

    8. News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch’s media monolith that owns Fox News avoids paying American taxes through its 152 subsidiaries in tax havens from the British Virgin Islands to Hong Kong.

    9. Verizon, despite making $24.2 billion in pre-tax US income, paid no taxes and actually claimed a federal refund of $1.3 billion for the last two years, again all thanks to those offshore subsidiaries.

    10. Wells Fargo, the fourth largest bank in the US, which took $107 billion in bailouts, wrote off all its losses by acquiring Wachovia, thus paying no taxes. Yet its CEO earned $5.6 million in cash for his salary and $13 million in stock.
    Well, if you can't beat 'em, then join 'em!

    People need to quit bitching about their economic situation and be creative like Mark Zuckerburg or something.
    "Life's a journey, not a destination"
    -Steven Tyler

  18. #18
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    11,202
    Quote Originally posted by Brocktoon View post
    The federal government has a great amount of influence on the economy but less so on job creation. Approximately 15% of GDP is directly attributed to government spending. Furthermore the Federal government issues debt which is a major part of the world's financial market. Look at the local impact of a military base on a local economy. Lockheed Martin generates a huge part of its business from the Feds.
    In health care almost 50% of Americans ( and that number is pre Obamacare) came from government sources. This does not even count how federal regulation can create or destroy markets and thus impact the economy. Regardless of one's opinion of the Feds, they have a large role and impact on the overall economy.
    Top employers in Ohio...
    • 1 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 54,200 Bentonville, AR Retail: General Merchandise
    • 2 Kroger Co 38,000 Cincinnati, OH Retail: Food Stores
    • 3 Cleveland Clinic Health System 37,800 Cleveland, OH Health
    • 4 Catholic Healthcare Partners 28,200 Cincinnati, OH Health
    • 5 Ohio State University 26,800 Columbus, OH Education and Health
    • 6 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base1 23,800 Dayton, OH Government: Air Force base

    You will notice that the 5th largest employer is a Public University. The 6th largest employer in Ohio is an Air Force base. Our economy is already weak, but when cuts are made to the education and defense budgets, lots of civilians are put out of work.

    I personally would be willing to have a higher tax rate, as long as the effective rate only went up a small percentage.

    Businesses should have a minimum effective rate. No business in the United States should pay effectively no taxes.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...xqJ_story.html

    http://communities.washingtontimes.c...rs-wall-shame/
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  19. #19
    Cyburbian Brocktoon's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Promoting synergies...
    Posts
    3,602
    Quote Originally posted by Hink_Planner View post
    Top employers in Ohio...
    • 1 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 54,200 Bentonville, AR Retail: General Merchandise
    • 2 Kroger Co 38,000 Cincinnati, OH Retail: Food Stores
    • 3 Cleveland Clinic Health System 37,800 Cleveland, OH Health
    • 4 Catholic Healthcare Partners 28,200 Cincinnati, OH Health
    • 5 Ohio State University 26,800 Columbus, OH Education and Health
    • 6 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base1 23,800 Dayton, OH Government: Air Force base

    You will notice that the 5th largest employer is a Public University. The 6th largest employer in Ohio is an Air Force base. Our economy is already weak, but when cuts are made to the education and defense budgets, lots of civilians are put out of work.

    I personally would be willing to have a higher tax rate, as long as the effective rate only went up a small percentage.

    Businesses should have a minimum effective rate. No business in the United States should pay effectively no taxes.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...xqJ_story.html

    http://communities.washingtontimes.c...rs-wall-shame/

    #3 and #4 are non profits who derive a large portion of their revenue through government sources.
    "You merely adopted the dark. I was born in it,..." -Bane

  20. #20
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In a new discovered reality where it doesn't snow
    Posts
    14,083
    Quote Originally posted by Hink_Planner View post
    Top employers in Ohio...
    • 1 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 54,200 Bentonville, AR Retail: General Merchandise
    • 2 Kroger Co 38,000 Cincinnati, OH Retail: Food Stores
    • 3 Cleveland Clinic Health System 37,800 Cleveland, OH Health
    • 4 Catholic Healthcare Partners 28,200 Cincinnati, OH Health
    • 5 Ohio State University 26,800 Columbus, OH Education and Health
    • 6 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base1 23,800 Dayton, OH Government: Air Force base

    You will notice that the 5th largest employer is a Public University. The 6th largest employer in Ohio is an Air Force base. Our economy is already weak, but when cuts are made to the education and defense budgets, lots of civilians are put out of work.

    I personally would be willing to have a higher tax rate, as long as the effective rate only went up a small percentage.

    Businesses should have a minimum effective rate. No business in the United States should pay effectively no taxes.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...xqJ_story.html

    http://communities.washingtontimes.c...rs-wall-shame/
    In Ohio, what is the percentage breakdown of those employed by the government and those employed by a small business?

    On a national level, small business make up a little over half of all those who are employee and have accounted for 65% of the new jobs created over the past 15 years. According to the Small Business Administration, small businesses also account for over half of the non-farm private GDP. Brocktoon brings up a great point and it is true that many of these business to have government contracts such as most of us who work in the private sector.

    The more that I thought about it, the more I realize that the government does have an impact on the economy, but I don’t quite think that it is to the level that we think it is. I also think that we need to do more to strengthen our small businesses. Some economists including Paul Zane Pilzer, financial guru’s like Dave Ramesy, and economic sociologists including Oliver DeMille are now starting to recognize the ending of the large monolithic multinational corporation era, and an increase of collective entrepreneurship and small businesses.

    I personally believe that there should be more tax breaks for small businesses that employee less than a couple hundred people. That way the money could be spent hiring new people who will go out and spend to directly help the economy instead of indirect funding from the government. I agree that the massive corporations that employee thousands should have to pay their share of taxes, especially of they do commerce over state lines.

    Overall I wonder if it will matter much. We as a society have gotten ourselves into so much debt that the federal debt now accounts for half of all government debt in the world and some economists think that it will get much worse before it gets better. After all, the US Federal debt is around 30% of all the federal government debt on the planet. And it is only getting worse as an average of 10,000 new baby boomers become eligible Social Security and Medicare each day.
    Trusting a DC politician with your money is like trusting a hungry dog with a raw steak.

  21. #21
    Cyburbian DetroitPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where the weak are killed and eaten.
    Posts
    6,247
    I gotta agree with Michaelskis on this one it is far better to have a bunch of small and medium sized businesses than to have all of your employment bunched into a few related industries.

    I know all too well the problems of this simply due to my geography. When there is an issue, its not a small number of employees that get let go its hundreds of thousands!

    This is why I am not a big fan of large national chains such as the two you mentioned. If anything happens to these two stores the whole country is now in danger. Think of the amount of jobs in the supply chains alone that support these places.
    We hope for better things; it will arise from the ashes - Fr Gabriel Richard 1805

  22. #22
    Cyburbian safege's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Golden Valley MN
    Posts
    716
    I'm posting this link for anyone with enough time to read it.

    http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articl...ine.aspx#page1
    Psychotics are consistently inconsistent. The essence of sanity is to be inconsistently inconsistent.
    -Larry Wall

  23. #23
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    11,202
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    In Ohio, what is the percentage breakdown of those employed by the government and those employed by a small business?
    In 2010 the private jobs were: 4,248,300
    In 2010 the government jobs were: 782,300

    Hospital: 233,600
    Colleges & Universities: 51,900

    So you could total that 4.3 million to 1.1 million. Or roughly 4 to 1.

    My argument isn't that private business is bad... it is the government jobs are important too. We are so worried about specific sectors, but are happy to see the government sector removed? Where do these people go? Their unemployment counts towards the numbers too.
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  24. #24
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In a new discovered reality where it doesn't snow
    Posts
    14,083
    Quote Originally posted by Hink_Planner View post
    In 2010 the private jobs were: 4,248,300
    In 2010 the government jobs were: 782,300

    Hospital: 233,600
    Colleges & Universities: 51,900

    So you could total that 4.3 million to 1.1 million. Or roughly 4 to 1.

    My argument isn't that private business is bad... it is the government jobs are important too. We are so worried about specific sectors, but are happy to see the government sector removed? Where do these people go? Their unemployment counts towards the numbers too.

    I agree completely that jobs are good, even if they are government jobs. Most of my disappointment with the government is regarding the monetary policy over the past century and established by the Federal Reserve Board.

    First, in 1913 the Federal Income Tax and Federal Reserve Board was created in fear of economic panic. There however congressmen few fear that the tax rate could get as high as 8% or even 10%. Other congressmen at that time thought that they were crazy and explained to him that it could NEVER get that high. Over the years the Federal Government has become Audrey II from little shop of horrors when it comes to money. Additionally, it moved control of the nations money way from the government and into the hands of a collection of private banks, which were owned by foreign entities.

    Second, the US is on a fiat money system where our money is the value that it is because the Government says so, regardless of what its actual buying power is. This occurred in 1971 when the Richard Nixon dollar was removed from the Gold Standard. This was done to pay for the Vietnam War and to prevent an economic meltdown. Unfortunately, it caused many other issues, most of which would have made the melt down look like a walk in the park.

    Finally, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who was a classical Austrian economist, established policies that were to help balanced out the economy by deflating the dollar. This initially caused substantial increase in interest rates, but once the fear of lending settled and bad policies were weeded out, it brought in an era of prosperity. Alan Greenspan who replaced Volcker, was however a Keynesian Economist and believed that government spending and easy money was the way to go. This ushered in an era of massive debt loads for home mortgages and the establishment of both Fannie May and Freddie Mac. Ben Bernanke is Greenspan with a better personality and more willingness to loan out insane money to those who should not be borrowing.

    There are several economists that think that the economy will undergo a complete and total collapse on a global scale and all that the federal government can do is put it off a little longer. Those who are completely debt free and have investments in stable things will ride out the problems better. However the government wants us to go into debt and they are going more into debt.
    Trusting a DC politician with your money is like trusting a hungry dog with a raw steak.

  25. #25
    Cyburbian Emeritus Bear Up North's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Northwestern Ohio
    Posts
    9,327
    For America's largest corporations.....

    CEO total salary and benefits compared to average employee total salary and benefits:

    1980
    42 times more, CEO

    2010
    343 times more, CEO
    _____

    This Bear is not religious, but I feel I do have what could be called "Christian Ideals", including sense of responsibility, fair play, yadda. The 1980 numbers seem reasonable. The numbers in 2010.....no other words: Fuxking greed.

    Bear
    Occupy Cyburbia!

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 6
    Last post: 28 Sep 2012, 2:20 PM
  2. The economy is so bad that...
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 14
    Last post: 19 Aug 2010, 3:46 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last post: 16 Apr 2008, 11:48 AM
  4. This is stupid
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 11
    Last post: 28 Dec 2004, 10:36 AM
  5. Stupid is as Stupid does
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 3
    Last post: 05 Nov 2003, 4:34 PM