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 01:57:46 PM  
The job is not done until their status as a tax evasion domicile is gone.

That's the biggest reason there's a desire for devastation to visit Cyprus.
 
2013-03-18 01:59:10 PM  

InstaZen25: cameroncrazy1984: InstaZen25: MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!

I don't think you get it. The country was already farked. They just finally admitted it. There was no future for the young, just a false promise of one that the country could not afford.

There was a future, they just squandered it away because they were too afraid to raise taxes. And now they lost most of a generation.

People leave if you tax away their income too. This will be especially prevalent in the Euro-zone, where the wealthy aren't the only ones who can leave easily.

This is why the middle class usually takes the brunt of the tax burden in terms of %'s and real effect.


Just look at the mass exodus out of the northeast US.

My state, VT just lost population. Many high taxed northern states are having the same things happen. Where are people going? South and Southwestern states with lower tax burdens. Those states are also where the job growth is. It is not a coincidence. People (and business)  move from harsh tax environments to those that are more friendly. Now states, like mine, faced with aging work forces, more retirees, and lack of young people need to raise taxes further, which drives more people away. it is so painfully simple, but people are so stupid. You want jobs, growth, healthy middle class? Lower your farking taxes.
 
2013-03-18 01:59:19 PM  

Thunderpipes: Number 1: where you are employed is your choice. How much money you make, is your choice.
Number 2:. There will be no more underwriting. Obamacare means a fat smoking alcoholic will get the same rates as a 27 year old marathon runner. Who wins there? Choice is now gone.

You know who really gets shafted with Obamacare? Healthy young people. They can't afford it on their own unless they are poor. They will likely never get the good coverage via their employer without getting a big reduction in salary. Once again, we take from the good, give to the bad (take from healthy people, give to unhealthy. Just like everything else liberal, it takes away incentive to care.



Perhaps you missed this from my earlier point since it was implied so I will make it clear.  Underwriting (individual) risk in the health insurance context is a misnomer.  There is no risk that health insurance won't be called upon for coverage in a given year, it's almost a certainty.  Certainly, absent risk sharing, there is no possible way an individual will pay enough premium to give the insurer a reasonable chance at maintaining a positive loss ratio over a five to ten year period.

You however seem to be under a misapprehension that, since individual risk factors cannot be considered, there will be no actual underwriting involved.  The price which will be charged for the insurance policies offered will reflect the underwriting efforts of the insurer as they evaluate the population as a whole.  Meaning, while they can't assign a price to individuals based on their individual characteristics, they will assess the pool of insureds as a whole, meaning the marathon runner and the fat smokers, to see what the total cost of insuring them was (and will be) in order to assign a price that each of them will pay.  So the fat smoker will pay a little less and the marathon runner will pay a little more.  However, over time this will begin to balance out as the marathon runner gets pregnant, the fat smoker contracts diabetes, and the marathon runner is diagnosed with cancer.

The real benefit to all parties is the muted impact that catastrophic events will have.  While the marathon runner is less likely to have a major medical event its still possible that they could, say, get struck by a car.  Now, if individual risk factors were evaluated, their injuries and secondary issues would be taken into account upon renewal and their premium would be increased to 1) recoup the losses of the insurer since they had not assessed a high risk factor and therefore had not built up a large premium buffer and 2) to begin building up a higher premium balance in anticipation of future medical issues.  Now of course the marathon runner went from being low risk to being a high risk and faces, on top of the other expensive issues to be grappled with, a much higher health insurance premium.
 
2013-03-18 01:59:29 PM  

MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!


THIS.

Austerity is just simply a way to use financial solvency as an excuse to push the burden away from those that caused it to the people that can't avoid it.
 
2013-03-18 02:00:24 PM  

DamnYankees: Yay austerity!


In Cyprus? Haha. Silly Krugmanoid. Printing pieces of paper with symbols on it doesn't solve fiscal messes; it just papers over the problem.
 
2013-03-18 02:02:43 PM  
d38zt8ehae1tnt.cloudfront.net

Been saying it all along.
 
2013-03-18 02:04:15 PM  

Shryke: DamnYankees: Yay austerity!

In Cyprus? Haha. Silly Krugmanoid. Printing pieces of paper with symbols on it doesn't solve fiscal messes; it just papers over the problem.


But causing great pain to the banks that caused the mess works - see Iceland.

/Austerity for me, but not for thee?
 
2013-03-18 02:04:20 PM  

JK47: Thunderpipes: Number 1: where you are employed is your choice. How much money you make, is your choice.
Number 2:. There will be no more underwriting. Obamacare means a fat smoking alcoholic will get the same rates as a 27 year old marathon runner. Who wins there? Choice is now gone.

You know who really gets shafted with Obamacare? Healthy young people. They can't afford it on their own unless they are poor. They will likely never get the good coverage via their employer without getting a big reduction in salary. Once again, we take from the good, give to the bad (take from healthy people, give to unhealthy. Just like everything else liberal, it takes away incentive to care.


Perhaps you missed this from my earlier point since it was implied so I will make it clear.  Underwriting (individual) risk in the health insurance context is a misnomer.  There is no risk that health insurance won't be called upon for coverage in a given year, it's almost a certainty.  Certainly, absent risk sharing, there is no possible way an individual will pay enough premium to give the insurer a reasonable chance at maintaining a positive loss ratio over a five to ten year period.

You however seem to be under a misapprehension that, since individual risk factors cannot be considered, there will be no actual underwriting involved.  The price which will be charged for the insurance policies offered will reflect the underwriting efforts of the insurer as they evaluate the population as a whole.  Meaning, while they can't assign a price to individuals based on their individual characteristics, they will assess the pool of insureds as a whole, meaning the marathon runner and the fat smokers, to see what the total cost of insuring them was (and will be) in order to assign a price that each of them will pay.  So the fat smoker will pay a little less and the marathon runner will pay a little more.  However, over time this will begin to balance out as the marathon runner gets pregnant, the fat ...


And you just proved my point.....

The marathon runner pays more, the fattie pays less. And this is not because of profit or loss, it is because the government makes it so, using trillions of taxpayer dollars. It is not even close to a real risk system. You also assume the marathon runner will somehow get less healthy than the average person over time. Well, statistically, they will always be more healthy, but their will never get a better rate. Statistically, the fattie will always be less healthy, but will always get a better rate.

It is just a gigantic kick in the groin to healthy people. Just like it is a gigantic kick in the wallet to responsible people and businesses. It has no basis from an economic point of view, but it gets votes.
 
2013-03-18 02:10:35 PM  

sethstorm: MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!

THIS.

Austerity is just simply a way to use financial solvency as an excuse to push the burden away from those that caused it to the people that can't avoid it.


In a free society you elect those that caused the problem, ultimately making you responsible. The children for the most part really are the ones who can't avoid any of this debt crap. You can't pick where or to whom you are born.
 
2013-03-18 02:10:43 PM  

Thunderpipes: ACunningPlan: DamnYankees: CygnusDarius: Why can't the EU do what Iceland did?.

Because the EU is not a unified whole. Doing what Iceland did would be great for Cyprus but bad for Germany. And Germany has more clout than Cyprus.


Merkel is facing Federal elections in September; the German taxpayers are going "WTF" over continuously underwriting the cr$ppy countries debts.  This is her way of saying we're helping hold the EU together, but you won't get stiffed with the bill.  Much of the Greek bail-out money has "vanished" into the black hole which is the current Greek economy; so this bail-out came with pain shared by all.

And ultimately it's a way for the nutjobs running the EU to demand closer fiscal & political union.  It's essentially a power-grab.

It is working the same way here. Instead of individual countries, we have large groups of people. Some work, some don't. Some pay their bills, some don't. Some want to be responsible, some don't. In the end, the slackers need bailouts, and the only way to do that is to take from those that have been responsible. It is working the same here as there. Fail.


It's worse in Europe though, because this is empire-building on a massive scale.  There is too much power concentrated in too few hands & they all live inside an echo-chamber & feed off the EU monster.  Unfortunately there is no way out ; it will end in tears - probably not for quite a while yet - but eventually the whole thing will collapse under it's own dead weight.
 
jvl
2013-03-18 02:12:52 PM  

Speaker2Animals: 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!


As soon as we find a magic pony which farts money, then government can spend freely without consequence.  In the meantime, there is reality.
 
2013-03-18 02:13:40 PM  
RIP NATIONALIST COMMUNAZI EU EMPIRE
 
2013-03-18 02:15:04 PM  

sethstorm: THIS.

Austerity is just simply a way to use financial solvency as an excuse to push the burden away from those that caused it to the people that can't avoid it.


tada
default on the loans and fark the banks for lending your the money in the first place.
if enough countries do this, the banks will properly collapse as the card houses that they are.
The rich people who get screwed by this MIGHT learn to not lend money to just anyone.

/bah - of course we have been told that if we do this, the world economy would collapse. so there is that.
 
2013-03-18 02:17:34 PM  
News site called "Hot Air"

Sounds legit.
 
2013-03-18 02:20:33 PM  

InstaZen25: sethstorm: MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!

THIS.

Austerity is just simply a way to use financial solvency as an excuse to push the burden away from those that caused it to the people that can't avoid it.

In a free society you elect those that caused the problem, ultimately making you responsible. The children for the most part really are the ones who can't avoid any of this debt crap. You can't pick where or to whom you are born.


That presumes too many things that are not present in the population - age being irrelevant.  Even if you're of voting and majority age, you're assuming that people have perfect knowledge when it comes to the ballot box.  On the other hand, restricting the vote any further(as a bid to try to solve that problem) makes for perverse incentives.  Third parties would be able to control whether some people can vote through employment status or property ownership - despite the presence of a secret ballot - in ways worse than Tammany Hall.

It's a case of "it's a bad system, but it's better than the rest".   As for austerity, bankers are trying to offload it with political measures to people that realistically have no power - due to a broken political system in their country.
 
2013-03-18 02:21:39 PM  

sethstorm: But causing great pain to the banks that caused the mess works - see Iceland.


Oh? Is that so? And by "causing great pain to the banks", you mean "depositors", right?
 
2013-03-18 02:21:50 PM  

Thunderpipes: KellyX: cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: If it were untrue, you would have a point.

You want the EXACT model of the EU countries.

I'm a liberal and I've lived in an EU country, and I don't want the exact model of the EU countries.

So, stop telling us what we want.

Only thing I want is a universal healthcare system... and redheads... blondes too.. with big tits... that like to go to the range with me and shot guns that make those big tits jiggle for a while...

/worse Liberal ever I guess...

To the range? The range is the DEVIL!!! Guns kill you.

You know, I am as conservative as they come in all things but religion (idiots). I would favor a universal health care system, if it was broadly funded. The problem is, when liberals talk about single payer or Obamacare or whatever, it is just a gigantic wealth redistribution. If you don't have everyone paying, it is not ever going to be a good thing. I know people ignore it, but we have an excellent health care system here if you actually are a hard working family. I should be getting a plate and 13 screws removed from my tibia soon, wait time for a completely elective operation like this is 5-6 weeks here. Try that in Canada.


Probably why I said a universal healthcare system, i.e. part of your taxes from every paycheck go into it, with there being a scaled tax depending on what you make. To me that's not that complex, yes, the poor would pay little to no taxes for it or get refunded a large amount back and the rich would pay a lot more, but if there's rich people whining about paying 15% tax or something, I'll gladly trade you paychecks and pay the taxes.
 
2013-03-18 02:22:20 PM  

NephilimNexus: News site called "Hot Air"

Sounds legit.


They're tame compared to Free Republic.
 
2013-03-18 02:23:04 PM  

ACunningPlan: Thunderpipes: ACunningPlan: DamnYankees: CygnusDarius: Why can't the EU do what Iceland did?.

Because the EU is not a unified whole. Doing what Iceland did would be great for Cyprus but bad for Germany. And Germany has more clout than Cyprus.


Merkel is facing Federal elections in September; the German taxpayers are going "WTF" over continuously underwriting the cr$ppy countries debts.  This is her way of saying we're helping hold the EU together, but you won't get stiffed with the bill.  Much of the Greek bail-out money has "vanished" into the black hole which is the current Greek economy; so this bail-out came with pain shared by all.

And ultimately it's a way for the nutjobs running the EU to demand closer fiscal & political union.  It's essentially a power-grab.

It is working the same way here. Instead of individual countries, we have large groups of people. Some work, some don't. Some pay their bills, some don't. Some want to be responsible, some don't. In the end, the slackers need bailouts, and the only way to do that is to take from those that have been responsible. It is working the same here as there. Fail.

It's worse in Europe though, because this is empire-building on a massive scale.  There is too much power concentrated in too few hands & they all live inside an echo-chamber & feed off the EU monster.  Unfortunately there is no way out ; it will end in tears - probably not for quite a while yet - but eventually the whole thing will collapse under it's own dead weight.


It is not really any worse over there. The entire EU union is close enough in terms of GDP and population to be a reasonable comparison to the US. You describe our political system too, power concentrated in few hands, sounds perfect for us. And we too, will collapse under our own weight. Most people just don't really think about the numbers, because it does not effect them right here and now. But the numbers for the US are indeed a monster. Unless we make massive, massive cuts right now, we cannot escape the inevitable collapse.
 
2013-03-18 02:24:59 PM  

bonobo73: Gdalescrboz: Speaker2Animals: Don't be surprised if depositors start to move away from European banks and look for other options to protect their savings from the governments that can't solve their spending problems.

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.

I don't have a gambling problem, I have a "can't win my money back problem."

Your analogy is horrible and idiotic. Austerity didn't work in the 1920's is not working now and will never work as a tool for economic recovery.

1. Implement austerity measures
2. Lay off people in the public sector, stop providing services vital to maintaining a thriving workforce.
3. See consumer consumption, go down. See companies lay off more people further reducing consumer consumption. See companies drop contracts, delay expenditures in contracting economy.
4. Tax revenues have gone down.
5. Return to step 1?


You forgot the Profit step. Someone, somewhere, is getting rich in this process. Otherwise, it wouldn't continually be pushed by the people who are already rich.

Local, or small state, governments go broke, look to sell off assets. Rich assholes buy them up at pennies on the dollar. Yay! Depressions!
 
2013-03-18 02:25:16 PM  

KellyX: Thunderpipes: KellyX: cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: If it were untrue, you would have a point.

You want the EXACT model of the EU countries.

I'm a liberal and I've lived in an EU country, and I don't want the exact model of the EU countries.

So, stop telling us what we want.

Only thing I want is a universal healthcare system... and redheads... blondes too.. with big tits... that like to go to the range with me and shot guns that make those big tits jiggle for a while...

/worse Liberal ever I guess...

To the range? The range is the DEVIL!!! Guns kill you.

You know, I am as conservative as they come in all things but religion (idiots). I would favor a universal health care system, if it was broadly funded. The problem is, when liberals talk about single payer or Obamacare or whatever, it is just a gigantic wealth redistribution. If you don't have everyone paying, it is not ever going to be a good thing. I know people ignore it, but we have an excellent health care system here if you actually are a hard working family. I should be getting a plate and 13 screws removed from my tibia soon, wait time for a completely elective operation like this is 5-6 weeks here. Try that in Canada.

Probably why I said a universal healthcare system, i.e. part of your taxes from every paycheck go into it, with there being a scaled tax depending on what you make. To me that's not that complex, yes, the poor would pay little to no taxes for it or get refunded a large amount back and the rich would pay a lot more, but if there's rich people whining about paying 15% tax or something, I'll gladly trade you paychecks and pay the taxes.


And that, to you is fair. That is why we fail. Rather than have poor people work and chip in a little, just take more from the "rich", because fark you, that's why.
 
2013-03-18 02:27:45 PM  
If you liberals are right, why not just spend 20-40 trillion right now and give it to the poor? Would solve all our problems, right? After all, government spending 1 dollar somehow makes us get 2 in return. So we would be able to wipe out the deficit now, by spending 40 trillion this year!!! Then we spend 80 trillion, than 160!!! Next thing you know, we are all millionaires.
 
2013-03-18 02:30:14 PM  

Thunderpipes: If you liberals are right, why not just spend 20-40 trillion right now and give it to the poor? Would solve all our problems, right? After all, government spending 1 dollar somehow makes us get 2 in return. So we would be able to wipe out the deficit now, by spending 40 trillion this year!!! Then we spend 80 trillion, than 160!!! Next thing you know, we are all millionaires.


Now ask them to analyze the concept of governmental redistribution and moral hazards. Lulz.
 
2013-03-18 02:36:23 PM  

FarkinNortherner: The variation in income and employment related benefits, healthcare, even median retirement age is enormous. Ironically part of the reason the euro doesn't work in its current form is the lack of homogeneity.


Or rather the EU not admitting the lack of homogeneity and not factoring it in. This is not just a Euro question it goes all across the EU project, what is an acceptable standard of driving to pass a test in one country is laughably crap in another. Same for standards of police, evidence, judges etc.

Diversity should be a great EU strength overall but for it to work long term we have to admit that some EU countries have higher standards than others and they should not have to lower their sights because Goatherdia can't be bothered to change their culture of corruption and incompetance.
 
2013-03-18 02:38:54 PM  
The next european wAr .. Greek Nazis vs Germany. Lol
 
2013-03-18 02:39:09 PM  
It can't happen here, right?
 
2013-03-18 02:43:11 PM  

ethics-gradient: we have to admit that some EU countries have higher standards than others and they should not have to lower their sights because Goatherdia can't be bothered to change their culture of corruption and incompetance.


Troll! Britain totally maintains its lead in the twin areas of corruption and incompatance!!! Liberals believe such BS.
 
2013-03-18 02:47:12 PM  

ethics-gradient: FarkinNortherner: The variation in income and employment related benefits, healthcare, even median retirement age is enormous. Ironically part of the reason the euro doesn't work in its current form is the lack of homogeneity.

Or rather the EU not admitting the lack of homogeneity and not factoring it in. This is not just a Euro question it goes all across the EU project, what is an acceptable standard of driving to pass a test in one country is laughably crap in another. Same for standards of police, evidence, judges etc.

Diversity should be a great EU strength overall but for it to work long term we have to admit that some EU countries have higher standards than others and they should not have to lower their sights because Goatherdia can't be bothered to change their culture of corruption and incompetance.


Once again, can be completely true for groups of people within the US. Some have higher standards, some lower. But here, the liberal view is, the people with high standards should indeed be lowered because another group can't be bothered to change their culture of laziness and incompetence. If the EU should have standards, shouldn't we?
 
2013-03-18 02:48:02 PM  

Xaneidolon: It can't happen here, right?


they wouldn't try it. You are all armed with guns and mentally unstable and ready to have a reason to shoot at your government.
 
2013-03-18 02:49:09 PM  

monoski: Article did not capture what I saw as one of the more interesting aspects of the deal; Cyprus is alleged to have become a large money laundering operation for the Russian mob and corrupt govt officials. The response could be real interesting when the EU pulls 10% from those guys. The EU will probably be banned from adopting Russia's unwanted orphans.


I think Russian mob money has already been factored into this deal. If the taxation had been limited to the uninsured deposits and left the insured ones alone, the uninsured (presumably heavily represented by the Russian Tony Sopranos) would be looking at about a 20% haircut instead of 10%. I don't know whether the architects of this feared massive Russian flight or just getting their kneecaps smashed, but it looks like they decided to sting the little guys in order to give the big guys a break.

I think they massivly mishandled this mess in any case. Anyone with money in a European bank, particularly one in Spain or Italy, must be hauling it out of there as fast as they can by now. Nice bank run you've created, idiots.
 
2013-03-18 02:49:13 PM  

Thunderpipes: JK47: Thunderpipes: Number 1: where you are employed is your choice. How much money you make, is your choice.
Number 2:. There will be no more underwriting. Obamacare means a fat smoking alcoholic will get the same rates as a 27 year old marathon runner. Who wins there? Choice is now gone.

You know who really gets shafted with Obamacare? Healthy young people. They can't afford it on their own unless they are poor. They will likely never get the good coverage via their employer without getting a big reduction in salary. Once again, we take from the good, give to the bad (take from healthy people, give to unhealthy. Just like everything else liberal, it takes away incentive to care.


Perhaps you missed this from my earlier point since it was implied so I will make it clear.  Underwriting (individual) risk in the health insurance context is a misnomer.  There is no risk that health insurance won't be called upon for coverage in a given year, it's almost a certainty.  Certainly, absent risk sharing, there is no possible way an individual will pay enough premium to give the insurer a reasonable chance at maintaining a positive loss ratio over a five to ten year period.

You however seem to be under a misapprehension that, since individual risk factors cannot be considered, there will be no actual underwriting involved.  The price which will be charged for the insurance policies offered will reflect the underwriting efforts of the insurer as they evaluate the population as a whole.  Meaning, while they can't assign a price to individuals based on their individual characteristics, they will assess the pool of insureds as a whole, meaning the marathon runner and the fat smokers, to see what the total cost of insuring them was (and will be) in order to assign a price that each of them will pay.  So the fat smoker will pay a little less and the marathon runner will pay a little more.  However, over time this will begin to balance out as the marathon runner gets pregnant, th ...


Ironically - actual empirical data shows that both fatties and smokers are less of a burden on the medical system.

So, while I agree with your point; you've got it completely backwards.  I don't blame you, most everyone does.  But it's absolutely true - healthy people (fit, non-smokers) will live longer and rack up more medical expenses than unhealthy folk.

The marathon runner is getting a good deal.  The fatties/smokers are not.  Well, that's assuming equal lifetime earnings, I dunno if that's a valid assumption or not.  Regardless though, in terms of absolute cost - smokers and fatties (and especially fat smokers) are costing less.
 
2013-03-18 02:51:18 PM  

Evil High Priest: 1. Implement austerity measures
2. Lay off people in the public sector, stop providing services vital to maintaining a thriving workforce.
3. See consumer consumption, go down. See companies lay off more people further reducing consumer consumption. See companies drop contracts, delay expenditures in contracting economy.
4. Tax revenues have gone down.
5. Return to step 1?

You forgot the Profit step. Someone, somewhere, is getting rich in this process. Otherwise, it wouldn't continually be pushed by the people who are already rich.


It is the royalty trap.
As long as we have royalty, this problem will continually reappear.
High enough taxes on the TOP. On their wealth. On their inheritances
(It doesnt have to be the crazy 90%, but it can be 50%)

During periods where this is true, where the royalty is kept from taking everything, have been periods of prosperity. When we let the royalty run wide, we suffer.

Prediction:
Things will stay crappy while the royalty and their wealth is untaxed.
Things will improve greatly once we tax properly again.
The socialist/communist extreme is just as bad.
 
2013-03-18 02:52:20 PM  

JK47: ...


lh3.ggpht.com
 
2013-03-18 02:53:08 PM  

ontariolightning: Xaneidolon: It can't happen here, right?

they wouldn't try it. You are all armed with guns and mentally unstable and ready to have a reason to shoot at your government.


It's always interesting to get a viewpoint regarding some manufactured reality  from a representative of our poutine-sucking neighbor to the North.
 
2013-03-18 02:53:44 PM  

jjorsett: I think Russian mob money has already been factored into this deal. If the taxation had been limited to the uninsured deposits and left the insured ones alone, the uninsured (presumably heavily represented by the Russian Tony Sopranos) would be looking at about a 20% haircut instead of 10%. I don't know whether the architects of this feared massive Russian flight or just getting their kneecaps smashed, but it looks like they decided to sting the little guys in order to give the big guys a break.


this could have been so FULL OF WIN
cut the uninsured by 20%
the russians kneecap a ton of bankers
win-win
 
2013-03-18 02:54:15 PM  

InstaZen25: cameroncrazy1984: InstaZen25: MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!

I don't think you get it. The country was already farked. They just finally admitted it. There was no future for the young, just a false promise of one that the country could not afford.

There was a future, they just squandered it away because they were too afraid to raise taxes. And now they lost most of a generation.

People leave if you tax away their income too. This will be especially prevalent in the Euro-zone, where the wealthy aren't the only ones who can leave easily.

This is why the middle class usually takes the brunt of the tax burden in terms of %'s and real effect.


Reagan raised taxes 11 times in the 80s. Please explain why the economy got better after that?
 
2013-03-18 02:55:04 PM  

QuietMan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

Yeah!  I get to whip out the Keynes vs. Hayek rap battles.  :-)

//surprisingly good economic summaries for funny vids.


Disclaimer: vids funded by Geo. Mason U., the C students' U. of Chicago.  Keynes didn't hope for war to get his govt. funding on.
 
2013-03-18 03:02:47 PM  

jjorsett: ontariolightning: Xaneidolon: It can't happen here, right?

they wouldn't try it. You are all armed with guns and mentally unstable and ready to have a reason to shoot at your government.

It's always interesting to get a viewpoint regarding some manufactured reality  from a representative of our poutine-sucking neighbor to the North.


it isn't a manufactured reality.. It is reality.
Just the talk of banning assault rifles leads everyone to go buy guns and ammo they don't need.
A run on guns if you will, now imagine them talking bout siphoning money from your savings accounts
Rofl

Not ever gonna happen
 
2013-03-18 03:03:00 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.


I like you.
 
2013-03-18 03:06:34 PM  

BigNumber12: 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.

I like you.


Why? This is a buggy-whip argument, as well as a strawman.
 
2013-03-18 03:06:52 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: InstaZen25: cameroncrazy1984: InstaZen25: MyKingdomForYourHorse: studs up: They will grow up eventually and get jobs when economic freedom returns in full force. I have faith in the youth to recover quickly.

Austerity!

Confidently farking your country in the ass, then kicking the can down the road for your kids!

I don't think you get it. The country was already farked. They just finally admitted it. There was no future for the young, just a false promise of one that the country could not afford.

There was a future, they just squandered it away because they were too afraid to raise taxes. And now they lost most of a generation.

People leave if you tax away their income too. This will be especially prevalent in the Euro-zone, where the wealthy aren't the only ones who can leave easily.

This is why the middle class usually takes the brunt of the tax burden in terms of %'s and real effect.

Reagan raised taxes 11 times in the 80s. Please explain why the economy got better after that?


Because the minor tax increases he did were much less than the huge lowering of taxes he did. Might want to read. When you lower taxes by gigantic margins, but increase other very little, it does not mean you are increasing taxes the way you imply. Overall, he greatly lowered taxes, the country came out of a nasty recession and kicked butt.

Liberals want the opposite.
 
2013-03-18 03:07:54 PM  

Thunderpipes: Because the minor tax increases he did were much less than the huge lowering of taxes he did


[citation needed]
 
2013-03-18 03:10:24 PM  

Thunderpipes: Liberals want the opposite.


Obama raised taxes and now the recovery is really gaining steam. How do you explain that?
 
2013-03-18 03:11:27 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: Because the minor tax increases he did were much less than the huge lowering of taxes he did

[citation needed]


Good lord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
 
2013-03-18 03:12:32 PM  
Mattress > bank
 
2013-03-18 03:12:35 PM  

BigNumber12: 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.

I like you.


That world? Where we dominated all manufacturing after WWII? That's never coming back. Nev. Er. All we have left is software dev and high-speed pizza delivery.
 
2013-03-18 03:12:35 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: InstaZen25: 
People leave if you tax away their income too. This will be especially prevalent in the Euro-zone, where the wealthy aren't the only ones who can leave easily.

This is why the middle class usually takes the brunt of the tax burden in terms of %'s and real effect.

Reagan raised taxes 11 times in the 80s. Please explain why the economy got better after that?


He raised them for the cold war that ended. Sadly, wars bring folks together and tend to boost prosperity or at least the feeling thereof. See WWII when the U.S. was threatened. People will accept tax raises to beat up commies or nazis. They tend to dislike it when it when they are raised to pay off the debts of the stupid.
Also, tax raise = economy good is a little simplistic there.
 
2013-03-18 03:15:59 PM  

InstaZen25: Also, tax raise = economy good is a little simplistic there.


But I thought you said if you raise taxes then people will leave?
 
2013-03-18 03:17:37 PM  
It has become blindly obvious to me, thanks to this thread, that a whole metric ton of people have no idea how currency systems and macroeconomics work.

But whatever, you all keep on farking that chicken and being shills for those that took risks and do not wish to pay for them.
 
2013-03-18 03:19:44 PM  

Thunderpipes: ACunningPlan: Thunderpipes: ACunningPlan: DamnYankees: CygnusDarius: Why can't the EU do what Iceland did?.

Because the EU is not a unified whole. Doing what Iceland did would be great for Cyprus but bad for Germany. And Germany has more clout than Cyprus.


Merkel is facing Federal elections in September; the German taxpayers are going "WTF" over continuously underwriting the cr$ppy countries debts.  This is her way of saying we're helping hold the EU together, but you won't get stiffed with the bill.  Much of the Greek bail-out money has "vanished" into the black hole which is the current Greek economy; so this bail-out came with pain shared by all.

And ultimately it's a way for the nutjobs running the EU to demand closer fiscal & political union.  It's essentially a power-grab.

It is working the same way here. Instead of individual countries, we have large groups of people. Some work, some don't. Some pay their bills, some don't. Some want to be responsible, some don't. In the end, the slackers need bailouts, and the only way to do that is to take from those that have been responsible. It is working the same here as there. Fail.

It's worse in Europe though, because this is empire-building on a massive scale.  There is too much power concentrated in too few hands & they all live inside an echo-chamber & feed off the EU monster.  Unfortunately there is no way out ; it will end in tears - probably not for quite a while yet - but eventually the whole thing will collapse under it's own dead weight.

It is not really any worse over there. The entire EU union is close enough in terms of GDP and population to be a reasonable comparison to the US. You describe our political system too, power concentrated in few hands, sounds perfect for us. And we too, will collapse under our own weight. Most people just don't really think about the numbers, because it does not effect them right here and now. But the numbers for the US are indeed a monster. Unless we make massive, mas ...


I do agree with you in part about the similarities; although I've always cherished the notion US citizens are somewhat safeguarded from their political class:)  The trouble with the EU is it's meddling with national identities and cultures at the same time.  The states here have individual rights, but ultimately they do all see themselves as Americans.

In the EU that uniformity is less established which causes friction throughout the whole entity: e.g. the Greeks are pissed at the Germans for imposing austerity which puzzles the Germans who are in effect funding the Greeks.  The Greeks [naturally have national pride] are resentful [unfairly really] of German interference and of having an unelected troika oversee their economy.  Meanwhile the Germans don't understand why the Greeks can't be more German.....   Add an entrenched, blinkered bureaucracy committed to the vision no matter what, and it's a recipe for disaster.  Plus those in charge won't sacrifice their egos to consider the possibility of error.

At least in the US, it's Americans trying to solve America's troubles.
 
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 »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report