Is being in debt a good thing?

[Nuber]

That's great for a person, but (most) governments aren't like households.

I would suggest that no government is like a household. Households cannot print viable money, for example. Government is limited to its revenue generation plus its ability to issue debt plus its ability to print money plus its ability to manipulate its currency (the last two only apply to federal governments).

They simply issue currency and spend it (bonds are operationally unnecessary). There is no need to extinguish government liabilities. Furthermore, the government's deficit is our surplus. It's money they have spent into the economy that they have not bothered to tax away.

I think you are guilty of oversimplification, perhaps intentionally so.

One can make the argument (and we see it implemented everywhere) that government can function with finite levels of debt. I am not disputing that. There does come a point where excessive debt levels become problematic, and this exact point in time is debatable.

For me, I would rather see balanced budgets at all levels of government. I reach this conclusion largely based on two factors:

1. I would like to see citizens maintain as much of their personal property for their own personal use as possible (I am speaking about their income). Freedom is important to me and is the largest foundational principle that has made our country the financial powerhouse that it is.

2. I see an opportunity cost behind the expense of debt service. I can think of quite a few things that I would rather spend that money on than interest payments.

 

[Nuber]

Sir I started this thread, I congratulate you on a good sound budget I lived that way even before my retirement working in the factories of Michigan I always remembered my Father's advice buy what you need save for what you want. pay all bills as soon as you get them.

There is one thing I have to question though ,it is my belief for awhile there in the early 2000's there were less opportunities for younger people coming out of High school because of the outsourcing but since America now has Honda and Toyota factories in America and other nations we are somewhat coming back to American labor in America.eace

I don't think that outsourcing is as large a problem as it is made out to be. The reason labor is outsourced is because outside labor is at least viewed by some as being more financially viable. In the end that means that more goods are available at a better price point because the labor component is lower. This should translate to more purchasing power on the homefront - assuming that the US workforce actually has other productive employment. To the individual that means keep your job skills up to date, or suffer the consequences.

An example that I like to use is the telephone operator. They were at one time a highly sought after commodity, but between outsourcing and technology the american telephone operator became a financial burden, not a benefit.

A counter example would be the "buy american" movement. If you compare products, the american made one is usually more expensive. When marketed correctly, the product is still viable in the marketplace.

The marketplace changes constantly, ultimately finding the most efficient means of production. BTW - efficiency is not only a measure of "cheap" or low cost. As such, both more expensive and less expensive options exist in a somewhat organic fashion. Freedom - I love it.

 

[presluc]

This says it all for you. JFK placed American missiles in Turkey and called ir the Cuban Missile crisis when the Russians gave him a taste of his own blustery bullying.

I didn't hold my breath or hide under a school desk, I laughed at the mutual idiocy. OMG! Kruschev banged his shoe on a desk at the UN, and visited Disneyland.

All hail the naysayers! :lamo

Didn't realize you were that old, do you also remember the bay of pigs and in both the missile crisis and bay of pigs what president at a press conference took responsibility for that.

Now you being a right winger probably don't understand that word responsibility it kinda faded out around Bush 1 with the after Desert Storm I'm giving Iraq back to Saddam Hussein we can trust him or the old "read my lips" no new taxes after which he raised taxes both were questionable but no responsibility for either.
Since then I guess politics became a case of monkey see monkey do from Clinton to G.W.Bush to Obama right up till Trump Responsibility is not the only thing to leave politics on both sides , moral obligation, to put America before any political party, to be for the progress of America and the American people all American people.. first.

Just a side note , as for your slander of Kennedy a great president who served his country in peace and war. Kennedy once said "lets not make it a Republican thing or a Democrat thing lets make it an American thing" Trump became president he said "my way or the highway" how many people has he fired again??How did Trump serve his country by filing bankruptcy???eace

 

[presluc]

I don't think that outsourcing is as large a problem as it is made out to be. The reason labor is outsourced is because outside labor is at least viewed by some as being more financially viable. In the end that means that more goods are available at a better price point because the labor component is lower. This should translate to more purchasing power on the homefront - assuming that the US workforce actually has other productive employment. To the individual that means keep your job skills up to date, or suffer the consequences.

An example that I like to use is the telephone operator. They were at one time a highly sought after commodity, but between outsourcing and technology the american telephone operator became a financial burden, not a benefit.

A counter example would be the "buy american" movement. If you compare products, the american made one is usually more expensive. When marketed correctly, the product is still viable in the marketplace.

The marketplace changes constantly, ultimately finding the most efficient means of production. BTW - efficiency is not only a measure of "cheap" or low cost. As such, both more expensive and less expensive options exist in a somewhat organic fashion. Freedom - I love it.

The reason labor is needed in America is quite simple TAX REVENUE , now outsource labor is viewed by some as financially viable may look good on paper but financially viable to who? Granted the Corporations would have cheaper labor making bigger profits which is good business after all that's what corporations want more profits nothing personal just business.
However there may be some flaws to doing business that way 1 Flaw would be every American paycheck gets taxes taken out of every paycheck in 2003 Michigan lost 400, 000 jobs in one district, I'll be generous and say $20 taxes taken out of each paycheck a week you do the math that's tax revenue going out of America federal ,state and local.in one district in one state..
2 Flaw number 2 is on a more personal note that a lot of business that outsourced jobs didn't see coming Quote from Corporations " It is not the responsibility of corporations to furnish Americans jobs" They were correct it is not . However they forgot two responses to this quote 1 That phrase "Be Patriotic buy American" kinda left with the jobs.
2 Quote; "It is not the responsibility to buy American products"

I guess the main question is if you buy foreign products it is foreign made If you buy American products foreign made ? Plus who pays for the fuel to get products there and back . I though Americans were told to conserve fuel.eace

 

[OldFatGuy]

Now you being a right winger

Silly labels mean nothing and rarely, if ever, display truth.

Had he not been martyred by assassination, the prince of camelot today would be viewed as one of our worst presidents. He created the missile crisis, *****ed out of the Bay of Pigs, set the stage with rabid anticommunism for the American war in Vietnam. He cheated on his wife, but worst of all "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Completely reversing the role of government to being served by the people and not serving the people. He was the spoiled son, second string, of old Joe, a mobster who ran guns and alcohol to make the family fortune while screwing starlets on the side as he paid for votes.

Ignorance proves there is no fool like an old fool. Blind minds make it worse. What aboutism is just drivel and drool from a fool.

 

[OrphanSlug]

The private sector is the driver of efficiency.

In our modern economic model, the private sector is the primary driver of profit. The line of best at efficiency between the private sector and the public sector became more obscure the more that large business models became dependent on government action and policy (namely worker and trade policy.)

We have many words we can use to describe the relationship of private enterprise and government function in our economic model, but what they really are is symbiotic.

The more we privatized profit and socialized losses the more we can conclude that efficiency is perception at best, and the condition of excess from risk amplifies our bubble and pop economic model that cannot be in any regard described as efficient.

 

[presluc]

Silly labels mean nothing and rarely, if ever, display truth.

Had he not been martyred by assassination, the prince of camelot today would be viewed as one of our worst presidents. He created the missile crisis, *****ed out of the Bay of Pigs, set the stage with rabid anticommunism for the American war in Vietnam. He cheated on his wife, but worst of all "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Completely reversing the role of government to being served by the people and not serving the people. He was the spoiled son, second string, of old Joe, a mobster who ran guns and alcohol to make the family fortune while screwing starlets on the side as he paid for votes.

Ignorance proves there is no fool like an old fool. Blind minds make it worse. What aboutism is just drivel and drool from a fool.

First of all the term right winger is just an adjective just says what and who you are .
You can always tell a right winger if you criticize Democrats or liberals or the left side they are quick to join in but if you point out a mistake mad by Republicans or the right side they become a bit protective usually slinging mud toward the Democrats or Independents , or some of the left's heros . This causes the Democrats and many Independents to question the substance of the Republican party/ right wingers could they be right all the time never making a mistake unlikely at worst at best flat LIE .
No political party can be right all the time just as no political party can be wrong all the time .
As for me I am an Independent voter When a political party or it's leaders do good for America I will praise them.However if any political party or their leaders are doing bad and making mistakes I will criticize them any political party including my own, can you say the same???

Ah, I see you've really researched John F. Kennedy might want to fact check some of those remarks
As far as the quote "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country"
Reversing the rolls of government ???
Man you are a step behind, if you didn't get the meaning of that speech.
Kennedy was talking to the American people all the American people even those in government.

As far as your last line perhaps I am an old fool , I've been proven wrong more than once.
However at least I follow my own path I don't blindly follow any political party. Perhaps when I was a die hard Democrat I was wearing blinders that ended for me in 2012 when I started asking questions of the then President Barack Obama .

So you just keep following that political party, but I must warn you neither Democrats or Republicans like interrogative sentences so Declarative sentences only if you really dislike something the political party does just grunt a lot of political leaders are good at that, that and distraction.

For that matter they use distraction so much they don't know when they are being distracted.lol

I started this thread check the the thread's name?
Check post #80
Does it have anything at all to do with "IS BEING IN DEBT A GOOD THING"

DISTRACTION, OFF TOPIC , I too can play that game nice or nasty , your choice.eace

 

[OldFatGuy]

"IS BEING IN DEBT A GOOD THING"

I answered that question and you went blathering on.

Obviously, your JFK research is lacking. He was just one more s**theel politician saying do what I say not what I do. From a corrupt family, and remaining, so like all aristocrats.

Yada Yada

 

[Nuber]

The reason labor is needed in America is quite simple TAX REVENUE

Taxation is not the reason for labor to exist. Labor is a mutually beneficial agreement between two parties, an employer and an employee (in the economic sense). Government simply tags along and taxes that labor.

, now outsource labor is viewed by some as financially viable may look good on paper but financially viable to who?

I stated my understanding of the benefits and to whom in my prior post.

Granted the Corporations would have cheaper labor making bigger profits which is good business after all that's what corporations want more profits

Yes, and it is up to the marketplace to curtail those profits. The consumer must be wise and willing to shop elsewhere in order to control corporate greed.

nothing personal just business.

Business is always personal, or your business will fail in my opinion.

However there may be some flaws to doing business that way 1 Flaw would be every American paycheck gets taxes taken out of every paycheck in 2003 Michigan lost 400, 000 jobs in one district, I'll be generous and say $20 taxes taken out of each paycheck a week you do the math that's tax revenue going out of America federal ,state and local.in one district in one state..

You can put me down for a flat consumption tax. I am very opposed to payroll taxes in all forms.

2 Flaw number 2 is on a more personal note that a lot of business that outsourced jobs didn't see coming Quote from Corporations " It is not the responsibility of corporations to furnish Americans jobs" They were correct it is not . However they forgot two responses to this quote 1 That phrase "Be Patriotic buy American" kinda left with the jobs.
2 Quote; "It is not the responsibility to buy American products"

Your verbiage is hard for me to read, I am not quite sure what you are saying here. Responsibility to furnish jobs is certainly not how I would describe corporate employment.

I guess the main question is if you buy foreign products it is foreign made If you buy American products foreign made ?

I really don't care where the product is made. I generally care about quality, price, and convenience. If all things are relatively equal; I do prefer American.

Plus who pays for the fuel to get products there and back .

All costs to obtain any product are paid by the consumer, ultimately.

I though Americans were told to conserve fuel.eace

I personally conserve everything that I can. Utilizing fuel to transport items is a viable use of fuel in my opinion, however.

 

[presluc]

I answered that question and you went blathering on.

Obviously, your JFK research is lacking. He was just one more s**theel politician saying do what I say not what I do. From a corrupt family, and remaining, so like all aristocrats.

Yada Yada

I'm sorry but in post #80 I don't see where you addressed this issue at. all .

As far as you answering a yes or no question "IS BEING IN DEBT A GOOD THING " I didn't catch your answer in any post towards me anyways a little political spin to let usAverage Americans know where the debt is but how do you say "WHERE'S THE BEEF " THE REAL ANSWER.
Man if I wanted a political spin I tune into FOX news or maybe catch a tweet by TRUMP., by the way is he an aristocrat???lol

YADA YADA ??? What did Trump give another tweet/speech and I missed it??? loloeace

 

[OldFatGuy]

I'm sorry but in post #80 I don't see where you addressed this issue at. all .

As far as you answering a yes or no question "IS BEING IN DEBT A GOOD THING " I didn't catch your answer in any post towards me anyways a little political spin to let usAverage Americans know where the debt is but how do you say "WHERE'S THE BEEF " THE REAL ANSWER.
Man if I wanted a political spin I tune into FOX news or maybe catch a tweet by TRUMP., by the way is he an aristocrat???lol

YADA YADA ??? What did Trump give another tweet/speech and I missed it??? loloeace

Buh Buh Bye

 

[presluc]

Taxation is not the reason for labor to exist. Labor is a mutually beneficial agreement between two parties, an employer and an employee (in the economic sense). Government simply tags along and taxes that labor.



I stated my understanding of the benefits and to whom in my prior post.



Yes, and it is up to the marketplace to curtail those profits. The consumer must be wise and willing to shop elsewhere in order to control corporate greed.



Business is always personal, or your business will fail in my opinion.



You can put me down for a flat consumption tax. I am very opposed to payroll taxes in all forms.



Your verbiage is hard for me to read, I am not quite sure what you are saying here. Responsibility to furnish jobs is certainly not how I would describe corporate employment.



I really don't care where the product is made. I generally care about quality, price, and convenience. If all things are relatively equal; I do prefer American.



All costs to obtain any product are paid by the consumer, ultimately.



I personally conserve everything that I can. Utilizing fuel to transport items is a viable use of fuel in my opinion, however.

My point is America is a capitalist Country . Capitalism's main fuel is money ,money comes from taxes. the more labor working the more taxes for the American government.

Perhaps, I am too old , but I can remember a time in history when jobs were not outsourced a much and labor made money corporations made profits
Outsourcing is not a new thing America was outsourcing as far back as 1968 just not this much Labor has never been even with the cost of living close back in the mid to late 50's but not quite .

However since the push to outsource more , there has been a factor that can not be overlooked first the bailouts corporations went whining like a bitch to the government for 740 million or their business would fail taxpayer money , after that came the American corporations that ran into a bit of financial problems GMC, SEARS, GAP CHRYSLER OR IS IT FIAT NOW , just to name a few a lot of chapter 7's and 11's filed. .
Is it possible that after the credit card debt hit 90 million the American worker/consumer decided to tap the brakes on spending or is it possible after the American corporations started shutting down and outsourcing factories with no negotiations some American workers might hold a grudge and a once loyal consumer is now shopping in a different area.?
Either way profits went down on more than one corporations.eace

 

[BahamaBob]

Everyone acquires debt, both individuals and governments. The important thing is that debt must be manageable. If your debt dictates how you live, you are in trouble. Next, you need to strive for intelligent debt. Instead of carrying a bunch of high interest credit card debt, it is smarter to consolidate it into a lower interest type of debt like a second mortgage.

All that said, it is harder now to remain debt free than it was in the past. I am a baby boomer. My first car although a beater was $50. For $500 you could get a pretty nice used car. For $1,700 you could buy a new Mustang. Back in the 60s everything was cheap so you didn't need much money. Gas was 30 cents a gallon, a average home was around 30K. We didn't make as much but we had a great deal more spending power. I was able to live well and still invest a good portion of my income. I put myself through college with the GI bill and working on the side. I acquired a masters degree and came out of college debt free. There is no way people could do that today. I also had 5 good job offers waiting on me when I graduated. The worst thing about those days was interest rates. I paid 14% and had to pay 5 points on my first house. That is why it behooved you to pay your home off as soon as possible.

Today, the millennials have a much tougher road to hoe. A college education is not worth nearly as much and those who chose some fields of study find that their diploma is worthless. In addition, as a comparison they pay a great deal more for everything. In my generation, you could generally pay all the essentials with about 50% of your paycheck. Today, I would estimate it takes about 80 or 85% of your paycheck to do the same. Some of that is due to higher costs and some is due to different needs. Things like I phones, I pads, GPS, Satellite Radio, Cable TV and many other things that are pretty standard now didn't exist then. It takes a lot of income for these toys.

Millennials are used to a higher standard of living and think they should be able to keep that standard. When I drive by a high school, I don't see beaters like we drove. I see BMWs and new Jeeps. In short, their parents pampered them much more than ours did. But this is the reason for what we see today. Young people want the government to pick up where their parents left off. They see that paying off their college debt and health care policy will eat up most of their spare money. They would rather be spending that money on a new Benz. What they don't see is if this is enacted they will be the ones who are paying for everyone else's student loans and health care. Instead of having limited purchasing power due to their own debts, they will have even more limited purchasing power because they are libel for other's debts.

 

[presluc]

Everyone acquires debt, both individuals and governments. The important thing is that debt must be manageable. If your debt dictates how you live, you are in trouble. Next, you need to strive for intelligent debt. Instead of carrying a bunch of high interest credit card debt, it is smarter to consolidate it into a lower interest type of debt like a second mortgage.

All that said, it is harder now to remain debt free than it was in the past. I am a baby boomer. My first car although a beater was $50. For $500 you could get a pretty nice used car. For $1,700 you could buy a new Mustang. Back in the 60s everything was cheap so you didn't need much money. Gas was 30 cents a gallon, a average home was around 30K. We didn't make as much but we had a great deal more spending power. I was able to live well and still invest a good portion of my income. I put myself through college with the GI bill and working on the side. I acquired a masters degree and came out of college debt free. There is no way people could do that today. I also had 5 good job offers waiting on me when I graduated. The worst thing about those days was interest rates. I paid 14% and had to pay 5 points on my first house. That is why it behooved you to pay your home off as soon as possible.

Today, the millennials have a much tougher road to hoe. A college education is not worth nearly as much and those who chose some fields of study find that their diploma is worthless. In addition, as a comparison they pay a great deal more for everything. In my generation, you could generally pay all the essentials with about 50% of your paycheck. Today, I would estimate it takes about 80 or 85% of your paycheck to do the same. Some of that is due to higher costs and some is due to different needs. Things like I phones, I pads, GPS, Satellite Radio, Cable TV and many other things that are pretty standard now didn't exist then. It takes a lot of income for these toys.

Millennials are used to a higher standard of living and think they should be able to keep that standard. When I drive by a high school, I don't see beaters like we drove. I see BMWs and new Jeeps. In short, their parents pampered them much more than ours did. But this is the reason for what we see today. Young people want the government to pick up where their parents left off. They see that paying off their college debt and health care policy will eat up most of their spare money. They would rather be spending that money on a new Benz. What they don't see is if this is enacted they will be the ones who are paying for everyone else's student loans and health care. Instead of having limited purchasing power due to their own debts, they will have even more limited purchasing power because they are libel for other's debts.

I too am a baby boomer, I grew up in the 50's 60's and 70's things were cheaper then that is true. My first car was a beater as well.
However , it is not only the individuals responsibility to make debt manageable,but also the governments responsibility to make debt manageable. This is done by the amount of tax revenue coming in vs the amount of payments going out , one version of this is taxes , taxes are taken out of every paycheck so why is the government outsourcing American jobs who pay taxes to cheap foreign nations who don't?

It is as you say, things like Iphones ,GPS, Satellite radio, Cable T.V.,and many other things that are pretty standard now didn't exist then.
However many opportunities to work at a good paying job and pay taxes and make a good living are in fact gone n

I was once a Hippie I worked in a factory for a living marched for Civil Rights , protested the War in Vietnam protested during the Watergate scandal me and others thought we were going to change and unite America we tried,we failed. We started asking for alternative fuel to oil in 1968. they are still discussing that today. We ask for more money circulation instead we got less as the years past. Climate change was called global warming in my day it too was put on the back burner in 1968 they are still denying that today.
You are probably asking who they is,it is the old guard the ones that likes thing going to the rich and keeping new ideas , new conscripts and new legislator and the progress of America only for the select few They may have different names go by different political parties beware of such as these they only care for 3 things power money and greed.eace

 

[Kushinator]

In our modern economic model, the private sector is the primary driver of profit. The line of best at efficiency between the private sector and the public sector became more obscure the more that large business models became dependent on government action and policy (namely worker and trade policy.)

We have many words we can use to describe the relationship of private enterprise and government function in our economic model, but what they really are is symbiotic.

The more we privatized profit and socialized losses the more we can conclude that efficiency is perception at best, and the condition of excess from risk amplifies our bubble and pop economic model that cannot be in any regard described as efficient.

Forgot about this post.

My post in no way advocated crony capitalism. We want the economy to be driven (in the long run) by the private sector, as it is impossible for government officials to be able to both conceptualize and prioritize the type of investment necessary to sustain/boost current living standards and technological transformation. With that said, it is sometimes necessary to seek additional funds from those making these decisions - namely businesses and the wealthy individuals who control them - in order to provide more solid footing for those not at the top of the economic totem pole. Deadweight loss can emerge from either side of the economic coin.

I am not immune to special interests corrupting our government. My initial comments pertained to the dichotomized exchange between Pirate and JFC, where one is ignoring the existence of market failure while the other does not acknowledge the opportunity cost associated with crowding out private investment.

 

[presluc]

Forgot about this post.

My post in no way advocated crony capitalism. We want the economy to be driven (in the long run) by the private sector, as it is impossible for government officials to be able to both conceptualize and prioritize the type of investment necessary to sustain/boost current living standards and technological transformation. With that said, it is sometimes necessary to seek additional funds from those making these decisions - namely businesses and the wealthy individuals who control them - in order to provide more solid footing for those not at the top of the economic totem pole. Deadweight loss can emerge from either side of the economic coin.

I am not immune to special interests corrupting our government. My initial comments pertained to the dichotomized exchange between Pirate and JFC, where one is ignoring the existence of market failure while the other does not acknowledge the opportunity cost associated with crowding out private investment.

I have some questions about your post.
You speak of an economy driven by the private sector{ in the long run}. You also say it is impossible for Government officials to prioritise the type of investment necessary to sustain /boost current living standards and technological transformation. These are your words are they not?.
, I have to ask what's the one economic standard that has remained in the forefront [a priority in Government] since 2000. Isn't it true that rich gets tax cuts , corporations get research grants and subsidies, that the tax cuts for the rich went up, are not all of these true?
It seems these were a priority for the American government. One more question , Where does the government get the money they give to the rich/ corporations? Unless I'm mistaken the American taxpayer.

Since the year 2000 when these tax cuts started and during which also some pocket change in the neighborhood of 740 million , some of the private leaders ran into some red ink went crying like a bitch to the government. You know the government that is impossible to both conceptualize and prioritise the type of investment necessary , well you know the rest.

So the private organizations could do better you think?

Private organizations like these GMC, FREDDY MAC, FANNY MAE , or maybe something a bit more reliable like Enron, Solodor How about the ones in America today like these,
Sears =chapter 11
JCPENNY =CHAPTER 7
The Gap chapter 11
GMC . I don't know what chapter of bankruptcy they are in but they closed all factories in Ohio.
Chrysler. controlling stock owned by Fiat
I could go on from Target , ect,, but you should get the point.
Private corporations are not doing to well in this decade.

I don't worry about private companies taking in lead in Government though. It would be how you say bad business.
Look if private organizations start pushing the government publicly there would be questions to the board if what they were pushing for wound up a bad investment .
However if private organizations stay just on the outside of government make a little promises a little whining you can be a risk taker without the risk after all your tax cut will cover most investments , you ask for a research grant for 1 million for alternative fuel, drop a few thousand on a couple of dead projects and start yelling drill baby drill.
The only draw back is every 4 years you have to go a little deeper in the money stash campaign donations ya know.eace

 

[OrphanSlug]

Forgot about this post.

My post in no way advocated crony capitalism. We want the economy to be driven (in the long run) by the private sector, as it is impossible for government officials to be able to both conceptualize and prioritize the type of investment necessary to sustain/boost current living standards and technological transformation. With that said, it is sometimes necessary to seek additional funds from those making these decisions - namely businesses and the wealthy individuals who control them - in order to provide more solid footing for those not at the top of the economic totem pole. Deadweight loss can emerge from either side of the economic coin.

I am not immune to special interests corrupting our government. My initial comments pertained to the dichotomized exchange between Pirate and JFC, where one is ignoring the existence of market failure while the other does not acknowledge the opportunity cost associated with crowding out private investment.

A quick review of GDP numbers tells us, beyond doubt, that the private sector drives the economy. Something like 65%-67% of GDP is flat out Private Consumption alone (this is before Gross Investment,) government expenditures or federal net outlays to GDP is roughly 19%.

The economic question is still before you, and the nature of our exchange.

What can you provide to show that market economics is to productivity/efficiency what planned economics is to equality?

 

[Kushinator]

What can you provide to show that market economics is to productivity/efficiency what planned economics is to equality?

Deng Xiaoping's reformist policy is easily the best example.

 

[Kushinator]

Private corporations are not doing to well in this decade.

Household net worth has grown by 91% since the beginning of 2009. This has been the most successful decade for markets... ever.

 

[OrphanSlug]

What can you provide to show that market economics is to productivity/efficiency what planned economics is to equality?

Deng Xiaoping's reformist policy is easily the best example.

I am asking you to do a little more than a one-liner response to this.

Because your answer without any context suggests a lean to authoritarianism via central planning, where ultimately what we have been asking is you to explain or prove is your assertion that "The private sector is the driver of efficiency."

 

[Kushinator]

I am asking you to do a little more than a one-liner response to this.

Because your answer without any context suggests a lean to authoritarianism via central planning, where ultimately what we have been asking is you to explain or prove is your assertion that "The private sector is the driver of efficiency."

I don't really need to say much more than that. We have many historical examples that show market economics is the driver of both efficiency and wealth. This isn't even a matter of dispute at this point.

Am I to take it that you disagree?

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

I don't really need to say much more than that. We have many historical examples that show market economics is the driver of both efficiency and wealth. This isn't even a matter of dispute at this point.

To leave the argument here, though, you would have to believe that the private sector, if left alone, always comes to the point of maximum possible efficiency and wealth. You would also be the one defining what the best outcome would be.

Does the market do a better job of putting a vast selection of breakfast cereals on the shelves to buy than some central planner would? Of course.

Does the market do a better job of allocating the fruits of the economy's production if left completely unfettered by government regulation/interference? No.

Would an $18 trillion economy with 10 people earning $6 trillion of that be "better" than a $17 trillion economy with a much more equitable distribution of income? Not the way I measure "better."

I think that smart government interference with the free market probably affords us a better economy than an unfettered free market would. Which is also why I don't buy into the crowding out argument.

 

[danielpalos]

The Once-Popular Purchasing Habits That Most Millennials Are Refusing To Buy Into



[FONT=&]SHARE THI
The Once-Popular Purchasing Habits That Most Millennials Are Refusing To Buy Into[/FONT]

And while they are buried in Student loans this generation is cutting cost wherever they can.




[FONT=&]Updated 2 weeks ago on August 28, 2019

[FONT=&]IMPAC

[/FONT][/FONT]

KENDALL BREITMAN
​

Some time ago in July 2013 I posted a thread called "America Land of Debt". I got some interesting responses on that thread some said being in debt is not bad , some said being in debt is just a way of doing business,.
I did not agree with these responses then neither do I agree with then today .
A lot has changed since my thread was posted about debt in America in 2013, but the one thing that hasn't America as a nation is deeper and continues to go deeper in debt.
This new generation of millennials I have almost nothing in common with I like land line phones they don't I like driving my own car they don't , I like beef , they don't they like the computer age of texting on line me I call to talk , and there are many more differences That doesn't make their lifestyle wrong , just different from mine.
The Millennials and I have one thing in common though we are cutting back to save money,.
As for me cutting back it won't matter too much for I am retired and shall we say past my prime, but there are a lot of products this new generation might not be buying in the future and if you check the link , Real Estate, Stocks and Bonds, Diamonds, Beef Cars are just a few that might show up short in future statistics..
Ladies and Gentlemen I await you commits on this issue,eace

KENDALL BREITMAN​

Only if you can service it.

 

[Kushinator]

I think that smart government interference with the free market probably affords us a better economy than an unfettered free market would.

When have i advocated an unfettered free market? Better yet, why are you responding to me as though i have?

Which is also why I don't buy into the crowding out argument.

Crowding out can occur whether you buy into it or not.

 

[FinnFox]

Being in debt is always bad thing. Currently I have small loan ($3293,76 = 3000€), that amount was missing for some work related stuff. Having 0 student loans, living in relatively cheap apartment (828^2 ft $571/month, with sauna) - I don't have hurry with pay back loan, but it's still always in my mind, like disturbing brain-worm. Being in debt is mental problem, something to deal with (like a prison).