Corporate Profits At All Time High: - Page 17

RandFan · 30th December 2012, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by SezMe

I have an idea but it might not rank as a solution. Reciprocal trade agreements instead of the bogus "free trade" agreements. If, for example, a country imposes a 20% tariff on imported cars then we should charge the same. The same concept could apply to labor law, environmental law, etc. Also, enforce and improve anti-dumping laws.

I like that. I'd be interested to know what those who would be opposed to it think.

Virus · 30th December 2012, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

So where was he again, kellyb?

Originally Posted by RandFan

Did you ever figure out what missing fathers had do with the discussion at hand? I'm guessing you will continue to play the obtuse game. Am I right?

Is your name kellyb?

Skeptic Ginger · 30th December 2012, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

Is your name kellyb?

Dodge duly noted.

Virus · 30th December 2012, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Dodge duly noted.

I know she did.

RandFan · 30th December 2012, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

Quote:

I'm guessing you will continue to play the obtuse game. Am I right?

Is your name kellyb?

I love guessing right.

RandFan · 30th December 2012, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

I know she did.

Have you ever answered a question I posed to you? I'm guessing one or two maybe but mostly you just dodge.

NewtonTrino · 30th December 2012, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Why? Interest rates are historically low and we can accomplish little if we don't get the economy moving. We have real infrastructure problems. Why can't America invest in itself through deficit spending? Isn't that what businesses do borrow to invest?

Speaking of the devil did you read Krugman's column today? Apparently i do agree with him on some things.

Anyway I don't have a problem with deficit spending per se. A reasonable amount of deficit spending during a recession which is then made up during the next up cycle seems reasonable to me. The issue I have is simply with the current level of spending which seems far far beyond what we can actually afford. I'll grant that with enough growth we can conquer our current deficit but if we go to far we'll end up eating up the entire budget with interest payments. Granted we can simply keep printing money but at some point we are going to end up paying the piper one way or the other. I hope to hell and back that we haven't passed that point already.

I've also pointed out before that the current approach we are taking to taxes isn't going to work. Even if we let all of the bush tax cuts expire we aren't anywhere close to having a balanced budget this decade. This is scary stuff.

The really sad part of the whole thing is that the businesses that actually do export are going to benefit a lot from the dollar dropping. My latest project so far is generating 2/3 of it's revenue from overseas so a falling dollar makes me richer in real terms. So I suppose there is a bit of an escape valve there.

NewtonTrino · 30th December 2012, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Unions negotiate legal contracts with their employees. When those contracts expire I'm pretty sure the employer could fire them all. Are you suggesting the employer should be able to just renege on their agreed contract?

I'm suggesting no such thing. I'm simply suggeting that laws which tilt the playfield either way are a bad thing.

Quote:

Guess Reagan didn't know that.

I would do the same thing to the NEA today that Reagan did. The teachers unions are holding us hostage at least in my state.

NewtonTrino · 30th December 2012, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I like that. I'd be interested to know what those who would be opposed to it think.

Personally I'm for cracking down on countries that abuse their currency like China. We should be holding countries that export products to us to the same conditions we hold our own companies.

RandFan · 30th December 2012, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by NewtonTrino

Speaking of the devil did you read Krugman's column today? Apparently i do agree with him on some things.

Anyway I don't have a problem with deficit spending per se. A reasonable amount of deficit spending during a recession which is then made up during the next up cycle seems reasonable to me. The issue I have is simply with the current level of spending which seems far far beyond what we can actually afford. I'll grant that with enough growth we can conquer our current deficit but if we go to far we'll end up eating up the entire budget with interest payments. Granted we can simply keep printing money but at some point we are going to end up paying the piper one way or the other. I hope to hell and back that we haven't passed that point already.

I've also pointed out before that the current approach we are taking to taxes isn't going to work. Even if we let all of the bush tax cuts expire we aren't anywhere close to having a balanced budget this decade. This is scary stuff.

The really sad part of the whole thing is that the businesses that actually do export are going to benefit a lot from the dollar dropping. My latest project so far is generating 2/3 of it's revenue from overseas so a falling dollar makes me richer in real terms. So I suppose there is a bit of an escape valve there.

Newton, thank you very much for the discussion.

30th December 2012, 02:20 PM	#641
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,112	Originally Posted by SezMe I have an idea but it might not rank as a solution. Reciprocal trade agreements instead of the bogus "free trade" agreements. If, for example, a country imposes a 20% tariff on imported cars then we should charge the same. The same concept could apply to labor law, environmental law, etc. Also, enforce and improve anti-dumping laws. I like that. I'd be interested to know what those who would be opposed to it think.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th December 2012, 02:51 PM	#642
Virus Master Templar Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 6,198	Originally Posted by Virus So where was he again, kellyb? Originally Posted by RandFan Did you ever figure out what missing fathers had do with the discussion at hand? I'm guessing you will continue to play the obtuse game. Am I right? Is your name kellyb?
	__________________ "The folks who proclaim their sensitivity, nuanced thinking, therapeutic concern for the tender sensibilities of others, and open-mindedness have always been the most vicious, bigoted, narrow-minded, crude, dogmatic, conformist people on the planet." - Victor Davis Hanson. Last edited by Virus; 30th December 2012 at 02:54 PM.

30th December 2012, 02:55 PM	#643
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,509	Originally Posted by Virus Is your name kellyb? Dodge duly noted.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

30th December 2012, 03:04 PM	#644
Virus Master Templar Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 6,198	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Dodge duly noted. I know she did.
	__________________ "The folks who proclaim their sensitivity, nuanced thinking, therapeutic concern for the tender sensibilities of others, and open-mindedness have always been the most vicious, bigoted, narrow-minded, crude, dogmatic, conformist people on the planet." - Victor Davis Hanson.

30th December 2012, 03:25 PM	#645
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,112	Originally Posted by Virus Quote: I'm guessing you will continue to play the obtuse game. Am I right? Is your name kellyb? I love guessing right.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th December 2012, 03:26 PM	#646
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,112	Originally Posted by Virus I know she did. Have you ever answered a question I posed to you? I'm guessing one or two maybe but mostly you just dodge.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th December 2012, 05:38 PM	#647
NewtonTrino Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Bothell, WA Posts: 3,782	Originally Posted by RandFan Why? Interest rates are historically low and we can accomplish little if we don't get the economy moving. We have real infrastructure problems. Why can't America invest in itself through deficit spending? Isn't that what businesses do borrow to invest? Speaking of the devil did you read Krugman's column today? Apparently i do agree with him on some things. Anyway I don't have a problem with deficit spending per se. A reasonable amount of deficit spending during a recession which is then made up during the next up cycle seems reasonable to me. The issue I have is simply with the current level of spending which seems far far beyond what we can actually afford. I'll grant that with enough growth we can conquer our current deficit but if we go to far we'll end up eating up the entire budget with interest payments. Granted we can simply keep printing money but at some point we are going to end up paying the piper one way or the other. I hope to hell and back that we haven't passed that point already. I've also pointed out before that the current approach we are taking to taxes isn't going to work. Even if we let all of the bush tax cuts expire we aren't anywhere close to having a balanced budget this decade. This is scary stuff. The really sad part of the whole thing is that the businesses that actually do export are going to benefit a lot from the dollar dropping. My latest project so far is generating 2/3 of it's revenue from overseas so a falling dollar makes me richer in real terms. So I suppose there is a bit of an escape valve there.

30th December 2012, 05:40 PM	#648
NewtonTrino Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Bothell, WA Posts: 3,782	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Unions negotiate legal contracts with their employees. When those contracts expire I'm pretty sure the employer could fire them all. Are you suggesting the employer should be able to just renege on their agreed contract? I'm suggesting no such thing. I'm simply suggeting that laws which tilt the playfield either way are a bad thing. Quote: Guess Reagan didn't know that. I would do the same thing to the NEA today that Reagan did. The teachers unions are holding us hostage at least in my state.

30th December 2012, 05:42 PM	#649
NewtonTrino Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Bothell, WA Posts: 3,782	Originally Posted by RandFan I like that. I'd be interested to know what those who would be opposed to it think. Personally I'm for cracking down on countries that abuse their currency like China. We should be holding countries that export products to us to the same conditions we hold our own companies.

30th December 2012, 06:34 PM	#650
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,112	Originally Posted by NewtonTrino Speaking of the devil did you read Krugman's column today? Apparently i do agree with him on some things. Anyway I don't have a problem with deficit spending per se. A reasonable amount of deficit spending during a recession which is then made up during the next up cycle seems reasonable to me. The issue I have is simply with the current level of spending which seems far far beyond what we can actually afford. I'll grant that with enough growth we can conquer our current deficit but if we go to far we'll end up eating up the entire budget with interest payments. Granted we can simply keep printing money but at some point we are going to end up paying the piper one way or the other. I hope to hell and back that we haven't passed that point already. I've also pointed out before that the current approach we are taking to taxes isn't going to work. Even if we let all of the bush tax cuts expire we aren't anywhere close to having a balanced budget this decade. This is scary stuff. The really sad part of the whole thing is that the businesses that actually do export are going to benefit a lot from the dollar dropping. My latest project so far is generating 2/3 of it's revenue from overseas so a falling dollar makes me richer in real terms. So I suppose there is a bit of an escape valve there. Newton, thank you very much for the discussion.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith