If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   The EU's plan to destroy their economy altered, new plans in place should only mostly destroy their economy   (hotair.com) divider line 342
    More: Followup, Cypriot, European debt crisis, bank rescues, deposits  
•       •       •

6392 clicks; posted to Business » on 18 Mar 2013 at 11:08 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



342 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-18 12:06:32 PM

Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit, and punish people for being responsible. Not much different.


dgt1.net
 
2013-03-18 12:08:36 PM

skozlaw: Got a real source by any chance instead of some poo-flinger's blog? Or is this just the thing they've discussed where they basically said that it's up to Cyprus to determine how to handle raising the money as long as they raised the money?


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
 
2013-03-18 12:09:26 PM

DamnYankees: Thunderpipes: This is what you guys want for the US.

Funny.

We want to tax deposits?


Well, quite a few people here always yell "tax wealth not income" and also biatch about companies who have large amoints of money in banks and not using it to make jobs. So taxing bank accounts would seem to be right up their alley
 
2013-03-18 12:10:06 PM
The economic problems we have right now can be simply summed up.

Too many middle-men making too much money doing no productive work - essentially paper shuffling manipulating "financial instruments"

We as a society need to get back to actually making things or providing services to each other rather than just playing the stock market like a personal casino.
 
2013-03-18 12:10:51 PM

Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit


So do you. Unless, of course, you don't want any state provided services. I suppose that's conceivably your position, but it's one that if applied in reality would result in disaster in fairly short order.
 
2013-03-18 12:11:06 PM

mr lawson: Well, quite a few people here always yell "tax wealth not income" and also biatch about companies who have large amoints of money in banks and not using it to make jobs. So taxing bank accounts would seem to be right up their alley


I've never really heard anyone here advocate a wealth tax as opposed to an income tax, so that's neither here nor there.
 
2013-03-18 12:12:08 PM

Day_Old_Dutchie: The economic problems we have right now can be simply summed up.

Too many middle-men making too much money doing no productive work - essentially paper shuffling manipulating "financial instruments"

We as a society need to get back to actually making things or providing services to each other rather than just playing the stock market like a personal casino.


This couldn't be more incorrect, especially the latter point. Does anyone actually believe that what we're suffering from is insufficient supply? That there's simply not enough 'stuff' in the world to fit the demand? What possible evidence is there for this? All evidence points to the exact opposite.
 
2013-03-18 12:12:14 PM

FarkinNortherner: Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit

So do you. Unless, of course, you don't want any state provided services. I suppose that's conceivably your position, but it's one that if applied in reality would result in disaster in fairly short order.


SHUT UP! TAXES ARE PUNISHMENT! YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS! THE SUCCESSFUL ARE SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE THEY'RE BETTER! I DON'T NEED ANYTHING!
 
2013-03-18 12:13:13 PM

DamnYankees: mr lawson: Well, quite a few people here always yell "tax wealth not income" and also biatch about companies who have large amoints of money in banks and not using it to make jobs. So taxing bank accounts would seem to be right up their alley

I've never really heard anyone here advocate a wealth tax as opposed to an income tax, so that's neither here nor there.


Really? Death tax threads. Paris hilton?
 
jvl
2013-03-18 12:14:28 PM

Speaker2Animals: Yeah, that's right, professor. They've been "solving" their spending problems in Europe for four years now and all that's resulted is higher unemployment.


Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances. No one promised employment would not be hurt, nor did they promise a pony.
 
2013-03-18 12:14:35 PM

mr lawson: DamnYankees: mr lawson: Well, quite a few people here always yell "tax wealth not income" and also biatch about companies who have large amoints of money in banks and not using it to make jobs. So taxing bank accounts would seem to be right up their alley

I've never really heard anyone here advocate a wealth tax as opposed to an income tax, so that's neither here nor there.

Really? Death tax threads. Paris hilton?


Inheritance tax covers the transfer of wealth, not the wealth itself. And don't call it "death tax," because you sound like a complete tool.
 
2013-03-18 12:15:29 PM

Day_Old_Dutchie: We as a society need to get back to actually making things or providing services to each other rather than just playing the stock market like a personal casino.


To do that we need to reduce offshoring. Easier said than done.

In my opinion the best* approach is to invent 'al Qaeda in the South China Sea' and start launching USS Cole style attacks on Chinese vessels as well as sabotage attacks on Chinese port infrastructure. Slow the rate of Chinese exports and increase prices by a few % and manufacturing in the west would start to look a whole lot more attractive.

*this may not, in fact, be the best approach
 
2013-03-18 12:15:37 PM

mr lawson: Really? Death tax threads. Paris hilton?


1) The inheritance tax is not a wealth tax - it a transfer tax, like everything else. You can like it or hate it, but at least face it for what it is - taxing money when it transfers from one party (the deceased) to another (the heir).
2) I've never heard anyone say we should get rid of the income tax in favor of the inheritance tax. People always want both.
 
2013-03-18 12:17:31 PM

jvl: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, that's right, professor. They've been "solving" their spending problems in Europe for four years now and all that's resulted is higher unemployment.

Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances. No one promised employment would not be hurt, nor did they promise a pony.


It's putting someone on chemotherapy because they're heavily burned. It's giving someone antacids because they broke their legs.  It's addressing a completely different problem from the one everyone is trying to address.

The economy starts with people working, earning, and spending money. Government budgets are secondary to keeping that going. What austerity does is change the oil because the car isn't working while ignoring the empty fuel gauge.
 
2013-03-18 12:19:22 PM

DamnYankees: Does anyone actually believe that what we're suffering from is insufficient supply? That there's simply not enough 'stuff' in the world to fit the demand?


Plenty of people believe that diminished manufacturing competiveness in highly developed economies has resulted in a decline in real incomes together with an unsustainable trade gap. That's less an argument about how much stuff we make and more about where we make it.
 
2013-03-18 12:19:58 PM
This might just pull the impending destruction forward.  I think their game is to threaten this to get a better deal out of the EU for the bailout.  If the EU body lets them do this it'll naturally be assumed that they're contemplating the same move in their countries.  There will be a run on all the European banks.  They have no good choices.
1. They have to boot Cypress out of the EU or pay them not to do this.  If they boot Cypress the rest of the EU may domino.
2.If they pay them the rest of the EU know extortion is ok when it comes to getting more bailout money and the downward spiral continues.
3. Let the tax on deposits go forward and you likely trigger a run on all European banks.
 
2013-03-18 12:21:59 PM

FarkinNortherner: DamnYankees: Does anyone actually believe that what we're suffering from is insufficient supply? That there's simply not enough 'stuff' in the world to fit the demand?

Plenty of people believe that diminished manufacturing competiveness in highly developed economies has resulted in a decline in real incomes together with an unsustainable trade gap. That's less an argument about how much stuff we make and more about where we make it.


Fair enough, but I think you'd agree that's a completely different topic of discussion.
 
2013-03-18 12:22:05 PM

DamnYankees: mr lawson: Really? Death tax threads. Paris hilton?

1) The inheritance tax is not a wealth tax - it a transfer tax, like everything else. You can like it or hate it, but at least face it for what it is - taxing money when it transfers from one party (the deceased) to another (the heir).
2) I've never heard anyone say we should get rid of the income tax in favor of the inheritance tax. People always want both.


So you are only for a tax if it transfers hands, ccorrect?
 
2013-03-18 12:23:47 PM

mr lawson: So you are only for a tax if it transfers hands, ccorrect?


I'd need to think about it on a case by case basis - everything is contextual. As a general rule I do think transfer taxes are the easiest to implement so I generally favor them.
 
2013-03-18 12:24:36 PM

bonobo73: Lay off people in the public sector, stop providing services vital to maintaining a thriving workforce.


It seems that you and reality have different definitions of the word vital.
 
2013-03-18 12:26:39 PM
FarkinNortherner: Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit So do you. Unless, of course, you don't want any state provided services. I suppose that's conceivably your position, but it's one that if applied in reality would result in disaster in fairly short order.

If it stopped at services I would agree with you.  But liberals don't want it to stop at services.
 
2013-03-18 12:27:24 PM

MattStafford: bonobo73: Lay off people in the public sector, stop providing services vital to maintaining a thriving workforce.

It seems that you and reality have different definitions of the word vital.


And by "reality" you mean "right-wing, Fox News, Tea Party alternate reality"
 
2013-03-18 12:27:41 PM
i.qkme.me
 
2013-03-18 12:28:01 PM

Gdalescrboz: But liberals don't want it to stop at services.


Stop telling us what we want.
 
2013-03-18 12:28:53 PM

Bloody William: Austerity is like addressing a heart condition from obesity by cutting off your leg because you'll weigh less.


Unless you are Latvia. Where it worked after all the gnashing of Keynesian teeth failed to sway their govt. Of course the fact that they are the fastest growing economy in the region now gets mostly ignored.
You are either an obdurate Krugman acolyte or ignorant. Please stop spewing these posts. We are all dumber for it.
 
2013-03-18 12:29:26 PM

DamnYankees: This couldn't be more incorrect, especially the latter point. Does anyone actually believe that what we're suffering from is insufficient supply? That there's simply not enough 'stuff' in the world to fit the demand? What possible evidence is there for this? All evidence points to the exact opposite.


No, you are completely wrong.  Having those people who did not produce buy things works out great initially, but what happens when that money eventually tries to buy back whatever they "produced".
 
2013-03-18 12:29:42 PM

Bloody William: jvl: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, that's right, professor. They've been "solving" their spending problems in Europe for four years now and all that's resulted is higher unemployment.

Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances. No one promised employment would not be hurt, nor did they promise a pony.

It's putting someone on chemotherapy because they're heavily burned. It's giving someone antacids because they broke their legs.  It's addressing a completely different problem from the one everyone is trying to address.

The economy starts with people working, earning, and spending money. Government budgets are secondary to keeping that going. What austerity does is change the oil because the car isn't working while ignoring the empty fuel gauge.


+eleventy on the hyperbole.

But you left out the part about the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor.
 
2013-03-18 12:30:13 PM

MattStafford: but what happens when that money eventually tries to buy back whatever they "produced".


Someone decides to teach you how to write in English and ruin fark thread forever?
 
2013-03-18 12:31:00 PM
This seems to really be about Cyprus taking money from citizens of other countries. Aren't they like the Cayman Islands of the Mediterranean? This new deal is just to appease the actual Cypriots. In other words: the voters. Seems like vote buying, or at least stealing less from you to gain favor as the best criminal on the ballot.
 
2013-03-18 12:31:38 PM
I can't wrap my head around this.  They are trying to take 5-6.5% of the money... Of all their money in those accounts...
And they didn't expect a run on the banks?!  It's basically theft, undermining the entire government and the entire banking system.

Worst idea I have ever heard.  And I live in Texas, where we let our teachers carry guns.
 
2013-03-18 12:31:43 PM

Gdalescrboz: If it stopped at services I would agree with you. But liberals don't want it to stop at services.


Yes because we want to rape your daughter, kill your puppy, kidnap your wife, and steal all your money so we can give to the crack smoking,HIV infested, herpes laden welfare abusing woman down the street living in her 8 bedroom town house subsidized with section 8, while her 32 kids by 30 different baby daddies run amok in your suburban neighborhood.

Ohh and the baby daddies start selling crack in your town as well.

Did I forget anything?
 
2013-03-18 12:32:10 PM

Gdalescrboz: If it stopped at services I would agree with you. But liberals don't want it to stop at services.


Fairly strongly depends on what you regard as a service that the government should be providing. However, irrespective of political hue or view of the role and size of the state, Thunderpipes apparent implication that he would remove the government's capacity to raise any mandatory taxes is ludicrous.
 
2013-03-18 12:33:02 PM
"So we're gonna go ahead and take money out of your bank accounts cause we're a little low on money"
"But...that's my money! I worked my whole life for that!"
"So yeaaaaaaaaah....we're gonna go ahead and take some of that money"
"But it's mine. You have no right to it!"
"So yeah, we're gonna go ahead and take it"
 
2013-03-18 12:35:30 PM

jvl: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, that's right, professor. They've been "solving" their spending problems in Europe for four years now and all that's resulted is higher unemployment.

Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances. No one promised employment would not be hurt, nor did they promise a pony.


Marie Antoinette!! I thought you were beheaded! F*ck the average person -- we have to take care of the elite while we're making the 99% suffer for our sins!
 
2013-03-18 12:35:51 PM

wildcardjack: When the Olympics moved on, taking its building projects with it, it left a little like a thief in the night. Exactly like a thief in the night in fact. It usually left in the very early hours of the morning, and the following day there always turned out to be a very great deal of stuff missing. Whole cultures and economies would collapse in its wake, often within a week, leaving once-thriving countries desolate and shell-shocked but still somehow feeling they had been part of some great adventure.


+1
 
2013-03-18 12:36:53 PM
How to both ruin and save an economy.
Depending on who you talk to.
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-03-18 12:37:39 PM

studs up: Unless you are Latvia. Where it worked


I wouldn't call a 20% crash followed by a 5% growth "work[ing]"
 
2013-03-18 12:37:44 PM

Day_Old_Dutchie: The economic problems we have right now can be simply summed up.

Too many middle-men making too much money doing no productive work - essentially paper shuffling manipulating "financial instruments"

We as a society need to get back to actually making things or providing services to each other rather than just playing the stock market like a personal casino.


So drop the tax rates for production below those of investment income.  Ding!
People talk smack about the "low" investment income tax rates.  Low tax rates aren't a bad thing inherently.   It's what they do  that is bad.  So instead of increasing the tax rate on "gambling," which is political suicide for Both parties at this point, let's drop the tax rates on real production.  Close all the exemption "loopholes" while you're at it, using an even hand.  Cut the R's favorite exemptions: crop subsidies and oil.  Cut the D's favorite exemptions: experimental energy technologies and perigovernmental organizations.  The "rich" will then choose to invest a higher proportion of their money in Making Things instead of the "casino" than they do now.  They won't quit the casino altogether.  They won't shift all their portfolios into 100% corporate paper and bonds.  But it would be an incremental shift that has a permanent positive affect.  Will tax revenues suffer?  Maybe for a while.  But wouldn't you prefer that we have a Making Things economy instead of a Casino economy?
 
2013-03-18 12:37:50 PM
www.republicain-lorrain.fr

Turns out in Cypress, when you withdraw money you always cross your legs while standing out...
 
2013-03-18 12:38:40 PM
Just a more open-than-normal display of the idea that if you wave around some magic papers and conduct the right rituals, politicians can justify that which would otherwise be utterly criminal, in this case, overt theft.
 
2013-03-18 12:38:41 PM

Gdalescrboz: FarkinNortherner: Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit So do you. Unless, of course, you don't want any state provided services. I suppose that's conceivably your position, but it's one that if applied in reality would result in disaster in fairly short order.

If it stopped at services I would agree with you.  But liberals don't want it to stop at services.


Always the liberal argument. "You don't want roads or police!". Ya, I do. I pay taxes for that. I don't want to pay taxes for methadone clinics, section 8 housing, illegal aliens' college tuition.

What liberals here want, is the exact same thing as the EU. They want to promise everyone the world so they get and stay in power. Only way to find that is by taking more and more and more from anyone who dares to succeed. Eventually, it fails. We will be Greece within 20 years. This is a fact.

Taxes should be broad based, and provide the minimum needed for the government to function. The states, as we debate here, are over 1 trillion in debt just because of teacher pensions (completely underfunded). Did you all know that? This is not about what the government needs, or what services people need. It is about entitlement spending, and what people want. They want taxpayer money given to them. Liberals oblige because it gets them votes and damn the torpedoes!
 
2013-03-18 12:38:51 PM

alabasterblack: How to both ruin and save an economy.
Depending on who you talk to.
[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 271x186]


Aaaand that's proof you have no understanding that macroecnomics is slightly different than microeconomics, or that there are many cases in microeconomics as well that "spending what you don't have" is the preferable option for long-term growth.
 
2013-03-18 12:40:50 PM
jvl:Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances.


And what has happened is the economies keep getting worse and worse, making the deficits higher, leading the misguided Eurofools to double and quadruple down on their bets. That's sure the path to stabilization. Uh-huh.
 
2013-03-18 12:42:29 PM

cameroncrazy1984: studs up: Unless you are Latvia. Where it worked

I wouldn't call a 20% crash followed by a 5% growth "work[ing]"


Actually even worse is the loss of a huge section of their younger population. That sort of drain on a population will have ramifications for the next several generations.
 
2013-03-18 12:43:13 PM

jvl: Speaker2Animals: Yeah, that's right, professor. They've been "solving" their spending problems in Europe for four years now and all that's resulted is higher unemployment.

Once again the critics pretend that austerity has failed because it has failed to reach the critic's imaginary goals.

The goal is to stabilize finances. No one promised employment would not be hurt, nor did they promise a pony.


"As regards the economy, the idea that austerity measures could trigger stagnation is incorrect.  I firmly believe that in the current circumstances, confidence-inspiring policies will foster and not hamper economic recovery, because confidence is the key factor today."

LINK

That's a quote from Jean-Claude Trichet, then-President of the ECB, in June of 2010.  How'd that work out, slick?
 
2013-03-18 12:43:44 PM

Thunderpipes: What liberals here want, is the exact same thing as the EU


Stop telling us what we want.
 
2013-03-18 12:44:57 PM

Thunderpipes: It is about entitlement spending,


So you think that the teachers don't deserve a retirement? And that the issue isn't that we have the lowest tax rates in 30 years and a growing, aging population?
 
2013-03-18 12:47:37 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: What liberals here want, is the exact same thing as the EU

Stop telling us what we want.


If it were untrue, you would have a point.

You want the EXACT model of the EU countries. Huge benefits, punish the wealthy, lazy people encouraged -- when things explode, grab the money. That is exactly how your boy keeps getting elected.  Promise his minions free crap, and defer the collapse because his followers are too stupid to care. 10 trillion in new debt from one President? Oh, no problem, just increase taxes....
 
2013-03-18 12:48:30 PM

studs up: Unless you are Latvia. Where it worked after all the gnashing of Keynesian teeth failed to sway their govt. Of course the fact that they are the fastest growing economy in the region now gets mostly ignored.


Latvia's debts have quadrupled, its unemployment rate is at 12% despite a reduction in the size of its under 25 workforce (thanks to economic migration), median incomes have fallen by 35% and an already abysmal standard of education and healthcare provision has got even worse. It also suffered the largest contraction of any European economy.

Still, it's now in growth, partly as a result of selling below-cost timber into Sweden thanks to European subsidies, so that's the post-Keynesians justified...
 
2013-03-18 12:48:41 PM

Thunderpipes: Gdalescrboz: FarkinNortherner: Thunderpipes: You want to take money from people, same thing really. You want the government to have the power to simply take money as they see fit So do you. Unless, of course, you don't want any state provided services. I suppose that's conceivably your position, but it's one that if applied in reality would result in disaster in fairly short order.

If it stopped at services I would agree with you.  But liberals don't want it to stop at services.

Always the liberal argument. "You don't want roads or police!". Ya, I do. I pay taxes for that. I don't want to pay taxes for methadone clinics, section 8 housing, illegal aliens' college tuition.

What liberals here want, is the exact same thing as the EU. They want to promise everyone the world so they get and stay in power. Only way to find that is by taking more and more and more from anyone who dares to succeed. Eventually, it fails. We will be Greece within 20 years. This is a fact.

Taxes should be broad based, and provide the minimum needed for the government to function. The states, as we debate here, are over 1 trillion in debt just because of teacher pensions (completely underfunded). Did you all know that? This is not about what the government needs, or what services people need. It is about entitlement spending, and what people want. They want taxpayer money given to them. Liberals oblige because it gets them votes and damn the torpedoes!


Just FYI, paying for methadone clinics is much cheaper than paying for police investigations of the property crimes committed by addicts.  And putting people in section 8 housing is much cheaper than paying for them to be housed in jails.  There isn't that whole "fark you for making bad choices" aspect, but it is more efficient.
 
Displayed 50 of 342 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report