Neither the Clinton nor the Bush administration saw it coming. That's why it's called a sneak attack. Had we known for sure an attack was coming, either administration would have acted immediately. There's simply no question about it.
Great start for Obama and America!
- Thread starter DougTravels
- Start date
Neither the Clinton nor the Bush administration saw it coming. That's why it's called a sneak attack. Had we known for sure an attack was coming, either administration would have acted immediately. There's simply no question about it.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Bush was not the cause of our economy going in the dumpster, the democratic congress is to blame. They were quick to condem the tax cuts, the refund checks and other Bush inititives when he got into office but If I remember right once the dems got control of congress, they thought handing people money with more tax refunds was the right thing to do. What Bush did do was to beleive we could spend our way out of this instead of demanding the heads of Frank, Dodd and others in congress, he in all intent and purpose is just the same as Obama. But Obama is helping it right along because he is setting the tone for more spending and more unhindered congressional action.
You think calling for and implementing the biggest debt in history is not having a big effect? You think creating $2686 of annual expense on that debt for every man, woman and child in the country is no big effect? You think $40k of actual debt for every man, woman and child is no big effect? Perhaps in your bank account those are nothing. They are big in mine.
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
C'mon, it started way before that. It started with deregulation way back in the early 80's. Then it was rediculous trade practices such as Nafta, the last nail in the coffin. Perot was right....I hear the sucking sound loud and clear. The WTO has made a mess of things as well. If you know the story of ISG steel, you know what I'm talking about. When you don't have a tax base you don't have revenue. It doesn't matter what the corporate tax rate is. 80% of nothing is nothing. 10% of nothing is still nothing.
This isn't an ambush, but more like a shooting gallery where falsehoods, inaccuracies and just plain bad ideas are brought into focus under the crosshairs of scrutiny.
DougTravels
Not a Member
Falsehoods, inaccuracies, and just plain bad ideas-The George W. Bush autobiography...In stores now!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Hey Doug, try answering the question I asked in the second post before you have an orgasmic interlude over Obama and the great change that has hit the nation.
Put into words with facts that we can all understand, not the media spin on things.
Letzrock, I somewhat agree but deregulation started under the Carter administration, not the Reagan administration. Deregulation is not the problem but as you said the WTO is. I think we need to revisit our position with the WTO and IMF, and actually consider revoking our latest GATT installment (which I think was signed under Clinton).
Put into words with facts that we can all understand, not the media spin on things.
Letzrock, I somewhat agree but deregulation started under the Carter administration, not the Reagan administration. Deregulation is not the problem but as you said the WTO is. I think we need to revisit our position with the WTO and IMF, and actually consider revoking our latest GATT installment (which I think was signed under Clinton).
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
The bottom line is we have very little manufacturing in this country anymore. Manufacturing makes the world go around.It really is that simple. We need to bring a large portion of it back.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
[FONT="]
[FONT="]Yea that is my point on all of this.
Obama can’t/won’t do it. [/FONT]He is incapable of doing anything that is thinking outside the box. His immaturity has been proven by the Green economy crap he has been talking about.
[FONT="]So history has shown us that shifting our economy is not the best thing to do. For example we are about to embark on our new Green forced (READ planned) economy which will fail.[/FONT]
[FONT="]To make sense of that babble, here is the explanation. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We moved form a manufacturing base (hard assets) to a tech base (virtual assets) in the 90s, ramping the tech base up in the late 80's. [/FONT]
[FONT="]This really looked good in the 90's, we were making money, the stock market was being inflated and we were producing so much revenue that anyone with an idea could do a start up dot com then get seed money to go public. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We got a new administration, we were starting to really roll in our economy and Clinton raised taxes which should have slowed us down but it didn’t because this was a new economy. We still made money, we still kept moved from manufacturing to tech and that is one reason why NAFTA happened, the administration pushed the idea we didn’t need all these manufacturing jobs, let the FILL IN THE BLANK make those things for us. With all these lost manufacturing jobs, it was sold to many that someone could easily get a job in the new economy (hint – the same thing is going on right now, get a Green Job!). [/FONT]
[FONT="]The propagandist used the increases in tax revenues to say Clinton saved us and people fell for it, the tax revenue gave us a PROJECTED reduction in the deficit which triggered more spending from Congress (remember Congress are like children, they see candy, they eat candy and they get sick after they ate all the candy). This increase was not Clinton’s doing but it was luck and congress. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Well we all know what happened with the dot com bubble bursting. We all know that this new dot com economy replaced the manufacturing economy and what we have now left is a gutting of what was left over – which is not much. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We do need to return to a hard asset based economy and the only way I can see this being done is replacing the tax system to return the off shore money to our economy, to allow investments in the country and so on. [/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]Yea that is my point on all of this.
Obama can’t/won’t do it. [/FONT]He is incapable of doing anything that is thinking outside the box. His immaturity has been proven by the Green economy crap he has been talking about.
[FONT="]So history has shown us that shifting our economy is not the best thing to do. For example we are about to embark on our new Green forced (READ planned) economy which will fail.[/FONT]
[FONT="]To make sense of that babble, here is the explanation. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We moved form a manufacturing base (hard assets) to a tech base (virtual assets) in the 90s, ramping the tech base up in the late 80's. [/FONT]
[FONT="]This really looked good in the 90's, we were making money, the stock market was being inflated and we were producing so much revenue that anyone with an idea could do a start up dot com then get seed money to go public. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We got a new administration, we were starting to really roll in our economy and Clinton raised taxes which should have slowed us down but it didn’t because this was a new economy. We still made money, we still kept moved from manufacturing to tech and that is one reason why NAFTA happened, the administration pushed the idea we didn’t need all these manufacturing jobs, let the FILL IN THE BLANK make those things for us. With all these lost manufacturing jobs, it was sold to many that someone could easily get a job in the new economy (hint – the same thing is going on right now, get a Green Job!). [/FONT]
[FONT="]The propagandist used the increases in tax revenues to say Clinton saved us and people fell for it, the tax revenue gave us a PROJECTED reduction in the deficit which triggered more spending from Congress (remember Congress are like children, they see candy, they eat candy and they get sick after they ate all the candy). This increase was not Clinton’s doing but it was luck and congress. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Well we all know what happened with the dot com bubble bursting. We all know that this new dot com economy replaced the manufacturing economy and what we have now left is a gutting of what was left over – which is not much. [/FONT]
[FONT="]We do need to return to a hard asset based economy and the only way I can see this being done is replacing the tax system to return the off shore money to our economy, to allow investments in the country and so on. [/FONT]
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
Tarriffs on imports will get it started. Big ones. Screw the WTO. Bush had a chance to stand up to them and he caved. This organization is as dangerous as any other enemy we have...Obama likely will do the same. This issue really needs to be brought to the attention of everyone and pounded in.
Last edited:
greg334
Veteran Expediter
No, I think tariffs will backfire on us, the best approach is changing how we actually do business here, starting with the tax system. The tariffs issue has been brought up before as a protectionist method to ensure jobs but it fails.
If we move to an all inclusive tax system that puts the burden on the consumer, then investments and business activity will increase. The problem right now is business pays about 15% of in federal income taxes, we pay something like 58% but that 15% is passed on to us as part of the cost of the product or service which is an all inclusive hidden tax.
Look at some of the things they did in Ireland and Georgia.
Greg said.
so we have a hidden manufacturer tax?
Which Canada did until the Mulroney days....remember him? singing Irish Eyes with Reagan? Well anyhow Canadians wanted a tax they could see at the register...and the GST {Goods and Services Tax} was born to replace the former....7% on EVERYTHING....It has been reduced to 5% now. Oh how people cried and whinned....paying tax on the labour at a dealership...womens personal products, everything that wasn't taxed before was now taxed....The old expression..becareful what you wish for...
Oh...did the manufacturers reduce their prices by 13%? Who knows.....
so we have a hidden manufacturer tax?
Which Canada did until the Mulroney days....remember him? singing Irish Eyes with Reagan? Well anyhow Canadians wanted a tax they could see at the register...and the GST {Goods and Services Tax} was born to replace the former....7% on EVERYTHING....It has been reduced to 5% now. Oh how people cried and whinned....paying tax on the labour at a dealership...womens personal products, everything that wasn't taxed before was now taxed....The old expression..becareful what you wish for...
Oh...did the manufacturers reduce their prices by 13%? Who knows.....
MrGautama
Not a Member
Which demands?
You mean having to borrow to fix the mess he inherited, how do you propose covering Junior's holes in the industrial and financial systems?, raising taxes?, throwing more money at the rich?. First we have to fix the fiasco and then begin the painful recovery process to solvency.
Any names?
MrGautama
Not a Member
Corporate tax is not passed all to us the consumers, it doesn't work that way, it's also absorbed in part by the shareholders as a diminished return on their investment and by the work force in the way of lower wages.
The "all inclusive" or "fair" tax would be around 30% and not the 23% that the proponents report; the misleading trick is in the language they refer to it as a "23% of the tax inclusive sales price" which can be estimated to be around 30% tax on the actual price of the item.
Who benefits from this tax reform?, for once the poorest Americans do up to around $24K, but also the most important part of course is the other side of the coin; anyone making more than $200K also will see their taxes go down!. In conclusion the middle class (you and me) will have to take the tax hike to compensate for regressiveness of this proposal. It is nothing more than another Bush-like tax cut for the wealthy with a little help for the poor as bait.
Do you mean Barney Frank's and Nancy Pelosi's et als holes? You'll find, if you can temporarily force objectivity for a few minutes, that the last few years of the Bush administration were spent calling for reforms, regulation and additional supervision at Fannie/Freddie and the left emphatically denied any need and obstructed any reasonable controls. Ohbrother is cleaning up the left's financial systems mess.
(Stow any comments on racism etc. as that is the generic utterance "Oh brother" one utters in abject dismay not a racial remark)
greg334
Veteran Expediter
To put this in perspective, meeting with Chavez and Castro's demands is not regaining respect was the complete quote, nevertheless watch and listen what happened, we now have a complacent leader. The demands are his participation in an apologetic posture as the leader of our country. Apologizing to another leader that something happened before he was borne is a very weak thing to do and shows he is nothing more than a child trying to play house.
I said; Having a faltering economy where our spending hasn't cuaght up with us is not showing signs of life.
NO I mean that the spending that our democratic controlled congress has been doing (and has caused the mess) hasn’t caught up to the economy yet. By the way it is not the president that inherited anything – that is BS – We Have. He is trying to garner more control out of the hands of congress and the people by using the treasury department to leverage the loans and grants that were made to fix the problems. He is creating more positions that are not needed within the government and appointing people to be “TSARS” who are bypassing the congressional approval process.
The real problem is that not many remember when government wasn’t involved and how well everything worked. The fiasco is the ignorant and stupid thinking that we must have the government regulate our financial system for our sake, these people think that the rich and greedy’s involvement is the cause of most of our problems in the first place.
I said; And picking consultants and people who expected payback is not smart, honest or competent.
Yea, that’s easy…. Here’s one…. Jeffrey Zients – political payback
He is going to be helping streamlining of our government which takes another step of removing our rights and powers. The streamlining of our government comes from reducing it to a manageable size which is congresses job, not the executive’s branch. Regardless what comeback you make, this attempt was done by ALGORE during the Clinton administration and kind of failed.
There are others, just look around… maybe if you knew about the up and coming healthcare fiasco you could pick them out.
I said; If we move to an all inclusive tax system that puts the burden on the consumer, then investments and business activity will increase. The problem right now is business pays about 15% of in federal income taxes, we pay something like 58% but that 15% is passed on to us as part of the cost of the product or service which is an all inclusive hidden tax.
Well how does it work? do they pull the money out of their a**es? Come on the money has to come from somewhere, and it is not the stock market. The cost of doing business to the company is always passed on to the consumer; the profit (stockholder’s returns) is what is left. I have a lot of examples but I am fairly certain you will dispute them.
Well the 30% is the fallacy number, simply because the balance between all the tax revenue collected from both corporate and personal income taxes and other taxes evens out to about 24.5%. Now this also means that some people pay a lot more than 24.5%, some companies pay a lot less and some people don’t pay at all but get money from the government for doing nothing. I think that the 30% is the number the opponents always give to scare people. Quite honestly if it has to be 30% ok, I would rather pay 30% tax on a new item for non-business use than to pay what I am paying in income tax now.
I feel that the country will benefit from this tax CHANGE, not reform, in a lot of ways that I don’t have time to explain. One by the way is the change from putting money into off shore accounts and returning that money here – that is something like 6 trillion being held offshore and by the way our American companies also shift almost 25% of their profits off shore to protect them from taxes.
The poorest will of course see a better life, believe it or not, more opportunities and the people making $200k or more will see their income tax liability go to zero. The thing that you miss is the herd effect in all of this, give the people the money and they will spend it. Spending it on new stuff, not old stuff is the key, get it? Isn’t that what the government is trying to force us to do to help the economy?
The real issue that many miss is this change will empower who ever does it; what if Obama says “I will push for the Fair Tax to be enacted”? I can tell you that people will not care about anything else but seeing they get more money in their pocket, he can even run for a fourth term because the people will be his followers without any doubt.
By the way, who cares what the wealthy get, they spend more money than you or I do, and that provides work for us the poor people of the country. If you care about the rich, then you are part of the typical brainwashed crowd who believes in class warfare. Worry about yourself and how things shape up for you or did I miss something with the Buddha there?
MrGautama
Not a Member
I read your post twice Greg, I really don't know what to say... You know, the average brain washed right winger's rhetoric is pretty much harmless, but what you express scares the crap out of most reasonable people because it's a well packaged deeply flawed delusion, it's dangerous as history has showed us many times.
At this moment the only thing that comes to mind is... "You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts".
At this moment the only thing that comes to mind is... "You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts".
If you were a company...Why would you come back to the US of A? What good would it do my companies bottom line? What or how much would it take to lure the company back?