What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[VaticanAssassin]

in a globalized economy, profits only tend to move in one direction, toward the capitalists. You can't exclude multinationals from this conversation, because they are the crux of the issue, and the reason for the lack of sustainability.


Do you think capitalism is sustainable? If so, why?

No....and in finally given your reason in bold above I find I agree with you.

Now, on how we fix this issue I am sure we disagree 100%.

 

[richard_daily]

No....and in finally given your reason in bold above I find I agree with you.

Now, on how we fix this issue I am sure we disagree 100%.

I'm not so sure.

I believe that the solution lies in localized, sustainable, community-centric economies.

Are you 100% opposed to that?

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

in a globalized economy, profits only tend to move in one direction, towards the capitalists. You can't exclude multinationals from this conversation, because they are the crux of the issue, and the reason for the lack of sustainability.



Do you think capitalism is sustainable? If so, why?

Perhaps I mis-read, were you referring to a global economy? And if so, why include multi-nationals in your argument when the bulk of their profits are being generated outside the U.S.?

Capitalism is very much sustainable (within one person's lifetime anyway). This is why Congress passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890. Stretch out the timeline farther and it should collapse on itself as liquidity in the economy dries up.

 

[richard_daily]

Perhaps I mis-read, were you referring to a global economy? And if so, why include multi-nationals in your argument when the bulk of their profits are being generated outside the U.S.?

Capitalism is very much sustainable (within one person's lifetime anyway). This is why Congress passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890. Stretch out the timeline farther and it should collapse on itself as liquidity in the economy dries up.

Well, that would be great, IF we were only talking about one (or even ten) person's lifetime/s, but the world's history is a LITTLE bit longer than that.

I don't understand your first question (not being facetious, I honestly don't understand what you're asking). If their profits are being generated outside of the US, but a corporation is based in the US, and relying on US corporate policy and the comforts of this country, why wouldn't they be included in the conversation?

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I'm not so sure.

I believe that the solution lies in localized, sustainable, community-centric economies.

Are you 100% opposed to that?

no, not 100%. But this is still capitalism!

I mis read you and thought you meant capitalism was bad 100%.

But here is were will will disagree.... Lower corporate taxes with zero loop holes.

Extreme penalties for outsourcing over sea.

 

[mercury14]

no, not 100%. But this is still capitalism!

I mis read you and thought you meant capitalism was bad 100%.

But here is were will will disagree.... Lower corporate taxes with zero loop holes.

Extreme penalties for outsourcing over sea.

What about corporate deductions?

 

[Sean Renaud]

no, not 100%. But this is still capitalism!

I mis read you and thought you meant capitalism was bad 100%.

But here is were will will disagree.... Lower corporate taxes with zero loop holes.

Extreme penalties for outsourcing over sea.

Assume nobody ever means that. Just as default, even if they say or write something that sounds similar assume that's not what they mean and work from there.

The rest of this sounds good but doesn't encourage the kind of growth we like.

Penalties for outsourcing ultimately hurts us all.

 

[richard_daily]

no, not 100%. But this is still capitalism!

I mis read you and thought you meant capitalism was bad 100%.

But here is were will will disagree.... Lower corporate taxes with zero loop holes.

Extreme penalties for outsourcing over sea.

No, I think that you are mis-interpreting the definition of a capitalist, which is at it's base, synonymous with plutocrat. A Capitalist doesn't just mean the exchange of goods and services for money, although that is one aspect of it.

I do think that capitalism is inherently bad (although not 100%). I don't think that the exchange of goods and services for profit is inherently bad.

The "lower corporate taxes with zero loopholes" mantra is a marketing tool, that you've been told to repeat.

I don't blame you for repeating it, it's pervasive, and on the surface, it sounds "correct". But the question is, why this has been promoted, at a time of extreme recession.

It's a power grab by capitalists, and they want MORE of your money.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

No, I think that you are mis-interpreting the definition of a capitalist, which is at it's base, synonymous with plutocrat. A Capitalist doesn't just mean the exchange of goods and services for money, although that is one aspect of it.

I do think that capitalism is inherently bad (although not 100%). I don't think that the exchange of goods and services for profit is inherently bad.

The "lower corporate taxes with zero loopholes" mantra is a marketing tool, that you've been told to repeat.

I don't blame you for repeating it, it's pervasive, and on the surface, it sounds "correct". But the question is, why this has been promoted, at a time of extreme recession.

It's a power grab by capitalists, and they want MORE of your money.

So you agree that outsourcing is a major issue , but believe what.....

Raising corporate taxes is the answer?

 

[richard_daily]

So you agree that outsourcing is a major issue , but believe what.....

Raising corporate taxes is the answer?

Eliminating corporations.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Eliminating corporations.

put them in the hands of the government?

 

[richard_daily]

put them in the hands of the government?

No, that's not what "eliminate" means.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

No, that's not what "eliminate" means.

explain man...I can not read minds.

 

[richard_daily]

explain man...I can not read minds.

Disolve them. Ownership (and responsibility) of business should reside in the hands of individuals, who are directly accountable for their actions, and who are not allowed to make unlimited contributions to government in direct exchange for legislation that suits their interests.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Disolve them. Ownership (and responsibility) of business should reside in the hands of individuals, who are directly accountable for their actions, and who are not allowed to make unlimited contributions to government in direct exchange for legislation that suits their interests.

I half agree with you. The other part puts me and a few million others out of work......

 

[richard_daily]

I half agree with you. The other part puts me and a few million others out of work......

You're a lobbyist?

 

[Sean Renaud]

I half agree with you. The other part puts me and a few million others out of work......

I'm curious, why do you think it would put people out of work?

For the record I'm not condoning his plan.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

You're a lobbyist?

The other part, as in the part not in bold.....

 

[richard_daily]

The other part, as in the part not in bold.....

And again, my question is the same; you're a lobbyist?

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I'm curious, why do you think it would put people out of work?

For the record I'm not condoning his plan.

Disolve them. Ownership (and responsibility) of business should reside in the hands of individuals, who are directly accountable for their actions....

Fixed income market could survive this with changes. The equity market would die......

 

[Wrong Element]

The news just gets worse and worse for the people who have been hoping things get worse and worse...


Confidence among American consumers climbed in October to a more than four-year high, which may help drive bigger gains in the largest part of the economy.

The Conference Board’s sentiment index increased to 72.2, the highest since February 2008, from a revised 68.4 in September, figures from the New York-based private research group showed today. The figure was projected to rise to 73, according to the median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg.

The percent of respondents who say jobs are currently plentiful rose to the highest level since September 2008, indicating that a decline in joblessness is brightening Americans’ moods. Lower gasoline prices and a budding housing recovery are also contributing to the improvement in confidence.

“The lower unemployment rate and firming of housing prices has made consumers feel a little bit more confident,” Richard Moody, chief economist at Regions Financial Corp. in Birmingham, Alabama, said before the report. “Household net worth is slowly but surely rebounding, particularly with house prices starting to go up. So that may be making consumers feel a little bit more confident about taking on bigger ticket expenditures.”

Stocks rose as reports today showed that initial claims for unemployment benefits declined more than forecast last week, companies expanded payrolls in October by the most in eight months and manufacturing expanded more than forecast.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-01/consumer-confidence-in-u-s-rises-to-highest-level-since-2008.html

 

[Sean Renaud]

Disolve them. Ownership (and responsibility) of business should reside in the hands of individuals, who are directly accountable for their actions....

Fixed income market could survive this with changes. The equity market would die......

Okay, let me ask a different way. Who exactly would this put out of work? (Aside from Wall Street)

What is this a bout a fixed income market and why would it be necessary at all?

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Okay, let me ask a different way. Who exactly would this put out of work? (Aside from Wall Street)

What is this a bout a fixed income market and why would it be necessary at all?

Fixed income..AKA; Bonds, Munis etc..

are you joking?

If you have a point just make it.

 

[unregistered]