So the future of success is built on growth. But that includes population growth. So we are destroying the planet. How do we have successful economy with no population growth!
ring in everyone
Printable View
So the future of success is built on growth. But that includes population growth. So we are destroying the planet. How do we have successful economy with no population growth!
ring in everyone
Raise everyone's standard of living and consumption levels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexamateo
Alternately as was suggested heavily tongue in cheek in a footnote by John K Galbraith "of course one could choose any given year as the target "standard of living" and work and invest to reduce the number of hours worked to achieve that standard, but I would never suggest that"
Well, the real problem is: If people are supposed to just "hold station", economically speaking, and that means don't keep buying more stuff and don't keep trying to make more babies, what the f*** are we all supposed to do with our time?
Here in the US we could find jobs for the 50 or so percent that pay no taxes. If the rest of us weren't paying for them we would have more in pocket and could raise our standard of living.
you may be right Air but I am wary that the rich have pissed off the poor and on top of that the republicans and big corporations seem content to rub the tax deal in the faces of the have nots. While many feel Romney is a shoo in I will not be surprised if Obama is re-elected in a landslide. To spurn the economy however, I expect the flood gates to open for immigration. Question is how many people can we adaquately support with resources?Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
You are in Barcelona and you are asking me what to do with lots of time??!!!! Dio mio! PRACTISE at making babies more creatively.. learn breath control. Trantric Practice baby making..... I have been friendly with a few nice wimmins from Barcelona and believe me, I had plans for hours and hours of activities we could spend our time doing....Quote:
Originally Posted by fandango
And in between rounds, one could read, learn languages, have a cup of________, relax, live life....maybe follow your interests.
I never understood this stupid economic model that we keep using even though it keeps failing!
IMO economists have the worse imagination out there and none of them has a clue what to do,so they keep re-inventing the wheel.
As well, why do we need growth? To cover the huge debts that politicians and economists managed to create?!
PS: I only buy what I really need, call me a minimalist, and more than 50% of my pay goes into savings, and won't change this just to help some failed system.
PPS: There is no reason to try to produce more every year and to expect it all to be sold/bought. As well there is no reason to produce crap in China when we could produce less and better products in Europe and the US, and in the process we would also use less resources and increase the bloody quality of life that everyone is complaining about. Stuff all those baboons who check the numbers every and of quarter and keep asking for more profits all the time.
That 50% figure is actually an overstatement of the true picture. Think about it: 50% of American households aren't unemployed, so the 50% just being based on households that do not have jobs is mathematically impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
From the Center on Budget and Policy:
But with that said, I do agree that we need meaningful tax reform to make the system more efficient and better balanced. IMO, and probably yours too, the U.S. tax system is seriously out of whack.Quote:
- The 51 percent and 46 percent figures are anomalies that reflect the unique circumstances of the past few years, when the economic downturn greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes. The figures for 2009 are particularly anomalous; in that year, temporary tax cuts that the 2009 Recovery Act created — including the “Making Work Pay” tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect and removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.
In 2007, before the economy turned down, 40 percent of households did not owe federal income tax. This figure more closely reflects the percentage that do not owe income tax in normal economic times.
- These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.[5] In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent. This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items.
- TPC estimates show that 61 percent of those that owed no federal income tax in a given year are working households.[9] These people do pay payroll taxes as well as federal excise taxes, and, as noted, state and local taxes. Most of these working households also pay federal income tax in other years, when their incomes are higher — which can be seen by looking at the low-income working households that receive the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).
No one wants or likes to pay taxes. But with my tax preparation, my accountant gives me a summary which lists, among other things, my effective tax rate. And what I noticed this year was that my effective tax rate was substantially higher than Mitt Romney's. And yet, my income was substantially less than Mitt Romney's. I don't like the idea of people sponging off the system at my expense either - at the bottom... or the top. A guy, legitimately on disability (maybe a soldier who got a leg blown off in Afghanistan), who receives benefits, yet pays no Federal taxes, doesn't bother me at all. While a guy who makes $20 million+ a year, and pays a lower tax rate than I do (only because the Congress Critters have created special "carried interest" tax breaks for those of his ilk)... now that p!sses me off a lot!
As for the OP, if we're talking about growth in terms of GDP, basically, GDP = C + I + G + (X-M).
C is consumption (not JUST consumer spending). I is private/business investment. G is government spending. X-M is the net of exports minus imports. In the U.S., the biggest driver is C (consumption) - roughly 70% of GDP. So in our case, we must have a scenario which allows people to consume. Our economy tanked, in large part, because wages were unable to keep up with Americans' desire to consume, so we turned to borrowed funds (credit cards, refi mortgages, car loans, etc.). In order to keep borrowing, we had to make believe that the collateralized assets were worth more than they actually were. And then the bubble popped. For sustainable growth, income must be at a level that goods and services can be had without relying too heavily on borrowing.
Oh no, I didn't mean ME. I meant people, them out there...Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa