A Prescription for the Economy

from JoeUser Forums

 

Let’s face up to fact, despite the current financial crisis, this country is a nation of consumers and to regain its lifestyle must continue to spend. Still, there is such a thing as moderation in pursuit of happiness. Oh, the wealthy must still have their car museums and mansions; the slightly lower scale their spacious homes and semi-private neighborhoods, together with flying first class to vacation lands or more moderate family trips via super SUVs to a resort, ranch or DisneyWorld—this is good for America; for in the process the well-off  the rich do spread the wealth around.

For the rest of us it is important once in a while to think big: get that HDTV and subscribe to digital, take a relaxing vacation occasionally, go to a fancy restaurant for one’s birthday, splurge on the kids for a happier life, while there is no better way to stimulate the economy. But think twice about buying a home if you are reasonably content in your rental apartment or present modest home. There’s far more to infrastructure than the obsessive housing industry. Senior citizens should make it a principle of living to cash their checks each month to keep the cash flow healthy. Yes, listen to your president shop the malls and discount stores, but be sure you don’t max out your credit card.

And there’s the rub: to have a thriving society American style there does have to be a way to distribute the wealth through stimulus packages of better wages, healthcare for all, retirement safety, better living conditions, along with college and vocational opportunities.

We can do this because we are a materialistic and ambitious people, but we need to be more generous.

Copyright © 2008 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: Nov 4,  2008.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com

http://www.lulu.com/rrkfinn

the economy politics
10,795 views 27 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top

I was going to say 'more cowbell.'

~Zoo

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

No Stevendedalus, taking from the earners to give to the non-earners is not a prescription for the economy.  But for disaster.  If Obama does as he says, we will not have to wait long to see that you are wrong, and I am right.

YOu cant make a poor person rich if his choice is to be poor.

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top

I was going to say 'more cowbell.'
End of quote
Are you on a prescription? :moo:

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting Dr, reply 2
No Stevendedalus, taking from the earners to give to the non-earners is not a prescription for the economy.  But for disaster.  If Obama does as he says, we will not have to wait long to see that you are wrong, and I am right.YOu cant make a poor person rich if his choice is to be poor.
End of Dr's quote
Back to Marx again, eh? Few choose poverty or monkish existence. Some homelessness, granted, is by choice, but most are mentally or physically sick. :pizza:

Reply #5 from PolMach Forums Top

YOu cant make a poor person rich if his choice is to be poor.
End of quote

True.  However, I doubt that most poor people wake up in the morning and say to themselves "Well, I can either be productive and make money, or continue to be extremely poor.  Looks like I'll keep being poor!"

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

Looks like I'll keep being poor!"
End of quote
Yeah, clearly unlikely. 

Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top

But if you penalize productivity then what is the motivation to produce?  Take a regular old 9-5 job for example.  If Joe, a guy who works his ass off coming in early and staying late completing all assigned early and taking on extra tasks, and Bob, a guy who comes in at 9 and leaves at 5 doing completeing all tasks on time but taking on no extra tasks, each are paid the same and get the same raise each year where is the motivation for Joe to continue working his ass off?  Now if Joe were given a higher raise or offered promotions because of his dedication maybe that would encourage Bob to do the same.  Penalizing someone for productivity only encourages people to slack off and this is exactly what "spreading the wealth" does. 

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Back to Marx again, eh?
End of quote

You brought it up.  I never mentioned it.  It seems that now the CYAs are trying to explain away things that sound like marx, without anyone asking them too.  I see a lot of guilt in your response.  Perhaps even you think he is just a tad too "Comradish" for your tastes (but admittedly you like him better than bush).

Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it (or have got it - your bed - you lie in it).

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

Penalizing someone for productivity only encourages people to slack off and this is exactly what "spreading the wealth" does.
End of quote
Productivity is not measured by hypeactive brownies who try to kiss up to the boss so the rest of us do our work competently. You'd be one of those guys who would not sign on to the 40 hour work week law to put an end to sixty-seventy hours.:cylon:    

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

No Stevendedalus, taking from the earners to give to the non-earners is not a prescription for the economy.
End of quote
Stop with the earners non-earners stuff. EARNED income is from work; unearned income is from savings [no work] or excess from decent living wages that can generate a cushion to save. Face up to the real guilt of a nation that doesn't respect nor reward hard working people who are too often left substandard lifestyle. And the crap we hear so much on this site that these people never had it so good contrasted to underdeveloped countries doesn't hold water because we're better than that. 

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

substandard lifestyle.
End of quote

Substandard?  WHat are they lacking?  A mercedes benz?  WHo me the Lacking.

EARNED income is from work; unearned income is from savings [no work] or excess from decent living wages that can generate a cushion to save.
End of quote

First, No one, least of all Obama is talking about taxing Savings (he is not that stupid).  SO your point is half over.  And the other one is simply class warfare.  WHO decides what is excess?  That "poor" guy has a standard, not substandard of living.

Cushion for savings?  My how we forget.  You dont need a color TV.  Save that money.  But wait!  They spent it!  Just like I did.  WHen I was young and starting out.  But as I got older, my income went up, and I started saving (it helped as my children grew up and left too).  Are you going to DICTATE that they save?  You have to in order for your rant to work.  After all, we have seen what they do when they have money to save - they spend it.  Not on necessities. But on creature comfort (or waste).

So what is next?  A tax on you that goes into a government savings account?  Sorry to tell you that, but we already have it.  And the ROR?  0%.  It is called Social Security.  You know the Ponzi scheme?

Face it, you want the economy to be fixed?  INvest.  And who is going to invest?  The rich.  The poor wont.  They will waste it on extravagances (dont beleive me?  Check out the Sirloins that are bought with food stamps - check out the lottery winners).  I eat chicken a lot.  And save some too.  I rarely eat steak.

If you want "stagflation", go ahead and give that poor man a bunch of money.  He will spend it.  On what we dont know since there will be no entrepreneurs to create thigns to buy.  But that wont stop them.  It has not yet.  And of course he wont have money to buy more - there will be no jobs. The poor do not create jobs - investment does.  And if you are thinking that "Wait!  The government can invest with the tax money".  That has been done.  It was called the USSR.  Worked well, didn't it?

Yea, and people yell when we call Obama a socialist?  My god!  If he takes your advice, we will be wrong.  He will be a communist.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

This discussion is not worth a blown artery. We'll never agree: you're a true political Darwinian and I believe governance includes giving a helping hand. 

Reply #13 from Stardock Forums Top

taxing Savings
End of quote

Savings interest is all ready taxed (if you're honest an report it on your taxes). JFK gave us that "benefit" before departing. He was also the first to tap into Social Security (to fund Vietnam War). I think Ben Franklin should be placed back on the half dollar. He said a penny saved is a penny earn, not a penny saved is taxed by the gov. When ever something is started, good intentions aside, it never seems to stop. We need to resist the desire to create problems in the future for the sake of expedience today.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

I believe governance includes giving a helping hand.
End of quote

I believe that is my Christian duty, not a coerced one.

Reply #15 from PolMach Forums Top

I believe governance includes giving a helping hand.
End of quote

There is a big difference between a hand up (giving someone temporary help when they fall on hard times) and a hand out (giving someone something for nothing for an extended period of time), "spreading the wealth" is a hand out.

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

"spreading the wealth" is a hand out.
End of quote
What's the hand out determinant of Katrina, earthquake victims, the unemployed and the downtrodden of plumbers stuck in cesspools?

I believe that is my Christian duty, not a coerced one.
End of quote
Religious conscience is coercion imposed by the soul.

Reply #17 from PolMach Forums Top

What's the hand out determinant of Katrina, earthquake victims, the unemployed and the downtrodden of plumbers stuck in cesspools?
End of quote

Victims of Katrina, earthquake victims, etc would be classified as people falling on hard times who need a hand up, that's what FEMA is for.  But going to the government because you are running out of money due to a failed business plan is a hand out.  Choosing to remain out of work because the government will continue to give you assistance is a hand out.  Does that help illustrate the difference?

Reply #18 from PolMach Forums Top

Im a perfect example. I lost my job due to the flooding here and was laied off. What did I do? after i got the permanate lay off notice i was on the phone and withen a week or 2 I was working full time. Granted it was not a proud job, but it got me off the UI that i was to get...to be honest i am thankful that i have not used more than 3 weeks of UI because I am still a temp, and I may get layed off yet again, so Ill have it now that there are litterally no jobs in my area.

 

Im not agenst helping those in need... i am agenst people that do not even try

Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top

Religious conscience is coercion imposed by the soul.
End of quote

But it is MY soul that is doing the coercing.

 

Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top

Choosing to remain out of work because the government will continue to give you assistance is a hand out.
End of quote
Unemployment insurance a hand out? Skilled employees have no choice is what you're saying--they should take the first minimum wage available. You want to put us right back in the position of millions during the Depression. 

Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

But it is MY soul that is doing the coercing.

End of quote
Yep, you dig soul, man--all the power to you.

Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top

doesn't hold water because we're better than that
End of quote

You got it backwards - it's because we're 'better than that' that it holds water.

Reply #23 from PolMach Forums Top

Unemployment insurance a hand out? Skilled employees have no choice is what you're saying--they should take the first minimum wage available. You want to put us right back in the position of millions during the Depression.
End of quote

UI is intended to bridge the gap between jobs.  It isn't intended as a long term solution.  Like I said earlier this is a "hand up" as long as the person receiving UI is activly seeking another job as watertown1978 pointed out. 

And yes I would say that anyone out of work should accept whatever work comes their way.  If I were to lose my job tomorrow naturally I would attempt to get a job similar to what I am doing now but I would also look for any full time job I could get quickly, even if that meant working at McDonalds full time while still looking for a more permanent job.

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

even if that meant working at McDonalds full time while still looking for a more permanent job.
End of quote
You might as well resign to flipping burgers then because it's tough to find a good job if not seeking full time.

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yep, you dig soul, man--all the power to you.
End of quote

I miss soul too!  Cant find good soul any more. ;)