economics note - Page 5

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: economics note
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 05:45:51 -0700 (PDT), George Herold

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Physical assets, like real estate and gold, are inherently protected
from money-printing. Or from non-Venezuela levels of money printing
[1]. Savings are diluted (stolen) by money printing. So printing
dollars drives people out of savings and into real estate and into the
stock market.

[1] I bet Venezuala has more billionaires than California. Socialism
made *everybody* rich.




--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 10:33:01 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
n wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
-unsustainable-if-i-had-a-magic-wand-i-would-raise-taxes.html
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ent
. They
iden-the-trade-deficit/
Quoted text here. Click to load it
vise
like the  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
se

Savings don't do anybody any good. The money should be invested in producti
ve enterprises - the stock market is there to let you do that.

Real estate that can be rented out is productive, but - as the GFC illustra
ted - it can get over-valued if the banks start lending irresponsibly.
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Being a billionaire in a country with hyperinflation isn't being rich.

Socialism does make everybody a bit richer - looking after the poor and the
 children of the poor leads to a more productive work force - but Venezuala
 hasn't got any kind of socialist economy. What it has is a failed economy,
 being run by politicians who have decided to label their party socialist,  
in much the same way as the Donald Trump Appreciation Society in the US has
 decided to label itself as the Republican Party, after a spell when it cal
led itself the Tea Party faction, and was widely known as the Koch brother'
s astroturf.  

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney

It means that you are stuck with worthless paper money that nobody wants.

Re: economics note
fredag den 2. november 2018 kl. 00.33.01 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

that's the point, stop people hoarding their money and instead force them  
to put they money to work

Re: economics note
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 17:34:59 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Money that is hoarded *is* put to work; few people keep cash under
mattresses. Savings is deferring consumption to investment.

Money that is spent is not.

Taxes force people to not save, but taxes are seldom used
productively.



--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 12:06:45 PM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

<snip>

Quoted text here. Click to load it

One of the more useful Keynesian insights was that people do keep money under the mattress during depressions. If they did invest their savings the depression would be over.

Technically, Keynes recognisied that markets don't automatically clear - piles of unsold goods can hang around for ages (particularly in a recession). The mathematically tractable economic models that were (and still are) popular don't recognise this.
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

That depends on who the money is spent with.
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Taxes don't "force" people not to save. They do have less money to spend or save after they've paid their taxes, but there's nothing about the taxes themselves that biases the choice.

Confiscatory tax levels don't leave a lot of money to spend or save, but that's a different problem.

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Re: economics note
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 19:23:18 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I beg to differ.  In the distant past, I sold a rental house.  I ended
up paying capital gains tax and AMT (alternative minimum tax).  The
amounts involved were huge.  My accountant summed it up nicely.  Find
something deductible on which to spend the money, or pay it to the
government in taxes.  I would have preferred to save the money as bank
deposits, certificates of deposit, and investments.  Instead, I burned
some money on various tax avoidance schemes which did reduce my tax
debt, but also put a big hole in my planned retirement savings.  In
other words, I didn't save much solely because of the taxes.

Currently, I pay my taxes through my business(s) as sole proprietor
and self-employed.  That gives me plenty of opportunities to contrive
tax deductible expenses.  However, I plan to retire fairly soon and
those taxes will now be paid out of my savings.  In other words, taxes
will decrease my savings and offer me no incentives to save.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yep.  At this time, I spend about the first 3 months of the working
for the federal and state government.  Double that if I include taxes
that I pay indirectly in pass through taxes from various businesses.
It's not quite confiscatory as I still have enough money left for
postage to mail my "contribution" to the appropriate agency.

Nothing is certain except death and taxes.  Modern medicine has made
great progress in deferring and preventing death.  Modern politicians
have done quite the opposite with taxes.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

At some point, maybe 50% taxation, working at tax avoidance is more
rational than producing and earning.  


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
On Fri, 02 Nov 2018 13:10:24 -0700, John Larkin

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The threshold of pain varies with the individual, but as usual,
there's some comedy involved.  In 2018, 44% of Americans were expected
to pay zero taxes:
<https://www.marketwatch.com/story/81-million-americans-wont-pay-any-federal-income-taxes-this-year-heres-why-2018-04-16
However, another poll, indicated that 45% of Americans thought their
taxes were too high, while the other 48% thought their taxes were
"about right".  
<https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/taxes/2018/04/25/how-much-does-the-average-american-pay-in-taxes/34138615/
Click on the video near the bottom:
   "A new poll finds that less than half of Americans think  
   their federal income taxes are too high, the lowest amount  
   since 2012."
It's not too difficult to guess which group thought their taxes were
"about right", leaving the other 45% believing that *ANY* level of
taxation is too high.

For at time, I thought moving to a tax haven would be a good solution.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates
Then I discovered that most acceptable countries had about the same
maximum tax rate (about 50%) as the US.  However, the US minimum tax
rate is zero for both federal, state, and local taxes, while many
countries have a finite minimum tax rate.  Since I expect to be in an
impoverished tax bracket, a finite minimum tax rate will not work for
me.  


--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 6:35:36 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Zero income tax, still 'payroll' taxes, (SS and medicare),
and any sales tax.  

George H.  
who also thinks income tax is too low to pay for everything.  
cut spending, raise taxes or both.    

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: economics note
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 10:24:23 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yeah, funny everyone was talking about income taxes and such but no one mentioned what we would need to do to balance the budget.  

Politics is a power struggle.  War in a sense.  All is fair in love and war.  Maybe one day we will figure out how to wage war enough to actually do the hard things.  

Rick C.  

Re: economics note
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 19:24:17 -0700 (PDT), George Herold

Quoted text here. Click to load it


That's zero federal taxes.  That includes SSI and Medicare, but not
state income tax and sales tax.  My guess(tm) is a fairly large
precentage of the 76.4 million non-paying tax payers are illegal
aliens, homeless, and welfare recipients.  I'm not so sure about the
very wealthy, which usually have private bills and loopholes to help
avoid paying taxes.
<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

Quoted text here. Click to load it

We do have spending limits, for what little good those seem to be
doing.  Never mind cutting spending or raising taxes.  How about
limiting government debt and cut off congress critters salaries to
zero until they understand the problem (negative feedback at its
best)?

--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Someone would find the money to pay them, things would be unlikely to
improve. (except for the payer)




--  
  When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

Re: economics note
On Saturday, November 3, 2018 at 7:10:36 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Taxes take away money that you could otherwise have saved,or spent.

The choice to save or spend is still yours.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Taxes aren't designed to give you any incentive to do anything. The tax system can - and in Australia does - give you incentives to invest in savings to pay a pension in retirement, but that's an incidental feature grafted onto the system.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Clearly true. 95% super-tax regimes fell out of favour years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates

Nobody now seems to try to collect more than 60% of earned income on the highest parts of the highest incomes.

This doesn't have any effect on the choice between saving and spending.

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney



Re: economics note
On Thursday, November 1, 2018 at 8:35:06 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wrong.   It is their money and people should be able to do whatever they want to do with their money.

But in any case there is not much money actually hoarded.  If you put money in a bank, the bank just loans it out.  The only way to really hoard money is to put it under the mattress.  Anything else and it gets invested.

                                  Dan

Re: economics note
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 12:46:36 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@krl.org wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
nsen wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
em  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
want to do with their money.

Up to a point. Keynesian pump-priming is designed to encourage people to th
ink that the economy is healthy, so they will want to invest their savings  
rather than hoarding them in a bank. There's no force involved.

Quoted text here. Click to load it
ey in a bank, the bank just loans it out.  The only way to really hoard mon
ey is to put it under the mattress.  Anything else and it gets invested.

Banks only lend money to people who can prove that they don't really need t
o borrow it. Their credit checking gets more vigorous in recessions, so the
y don't lend as much as would be socially desirable from the point of view  
of getting the economy back to optimal productivity.

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Re: economics note
:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 to borrow it.  

That is a load of bunk that is typically spouted by those who are not capab
le of thinking.  I'm surprised to see Bill spouting it.  I borrowed money t
o buy a car once and to buy houses twice.  In each case I needed the money  
for the purpose at hand.  Otherwise I would have not borrowed it and would  
have been saving money for decades to be able to buy a house.  Just one!  

Rick C.

Re: economics note
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 19:28:34 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wrong.  Banks only loan money to those who can prove that they can
repay the loan.  The only time the bank really gets involved in what
the borrowed does with the money is if the purpose is to buy something
which the bank plans to use as collateral on the loan.  

Also, I have a problem with the word "need".  What criteria would you
expect the bank to determine "need"?  What number do they put on the
degree of need in order to separate those who need more from those who
need less?  The prime purpose of a bank is to make money.  How does
their customers "need" relate to the banks profitability?  These are
all rhetorical questions that probably don't deserve answers.  What
they do is demonstrate that "need" should not enter into a financial
transaction.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sounds wonderful.  What really happens is that in a recession, the
Federal Reverse Bank lowers the discount rate on the interest it
charges member banks.  That allows the banks to lower the interest
rate it charges its customers, which allows more customers to qualify
for loans.  However, most of the money comes from customer deposits.
Lowering the loan interest rate causes the interest rate the bank pays
on deposits to also drop.  All that works nicely, until the interest
on deposits hits zero.  My working bank account currently pays a
whopping 0.01%.  Some banks are up to about 2% because people find it
more profitable to invest in stocks, bonds, or foreign banks.
<https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/rates/
What's missing from all this is social responsibility and other
intangibles that are difficult to assign a number or value.  Can I
interest you in a bank account that promises that your money will be
used in a socially or ecologically responsible manner?  As I vaguely
recall, that's been tried several times, with predictably dismal
results.  I suspect that most people don't want their finances mixed
with their banks politics.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: economics note
On Thursday, November 1, 2018 at 7:33:01 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Right there's a value that's ~constant.  If there's some relatively stable  
government issued currency. Then you you can use that to express the value.

After some hemming and hawwing* I'm in the process of selling  
me mum's house.  Value depends a lot on the buyer when it comes to houses.
(that's my limited experience.)  The realtor wants to list it  
(what she thinks is), semi low (270k). And thinks it might get bid up.  
assessed value is $200k.  270k is a lot more than I was expecting...  
we'll see.  (The guy next door offered me 200. so it's worth at least  
that.)    

George H.    
*when used with hemming there can be two 'w's, for symmetry.
  

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: economics note
On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 10:02:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why does JL say so many stoopid things?  The money supply doesn't work that way.  READ something.  Maybe you'll become smart someday.  

Rick C.

Re: economics note
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:05:26 -0700 (PDT), George Herold

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You can't create energy out of nothing.  Energy is conserved.  Wealth
is not.  It is created and destroyed all the time.

Site Timeline