Mark Cuban’s Stimulus Plan is a good idea


Always enjoy Mark Cuban’s  kick-butt prescriptions for economic success.   Sure he oversimplifies, but  like most successful entrepreneurial folks Cuban understands what a remarkable number of people do NOT understand – innovation drives our economy forward in powerful ways and our current bureaucratic-heavy approaches to the economy too often stifle innovation in business while failing to inspire innovation in Government (which is almost an oxymoron).

I was especially interested in this comment, something I’ve believed for many years:

There are exceptions, but more often than not, the stupidest thing a business of this size can do is borrow money.

Cuban:

Like the administration before it, the current administration seems to have no concept of what it takes to start, run and grow a small business. None. Here is a hint. If you want to see more jobs created by Small Businesses and entrepreneurs REDUCE the amount of paperwork required. Dramatically simplify the tax code. In other words, if you REDUCE THE OVERHEAD of small business, you effectively create capital for them through reduced costs.

Not only do you improve their financial position, but you reduce that great big time suck known as dealing with your accountants and lawyers. The more time wasted with “professional services”, the less time spent doing your job. This seems to be a concept lost on government. One last thing. It appears to be a goal of the administration to free up loans to small businesses. For the sake of this comment, let me re-define Small Business as those companies with fewer than 20 employees. There are exceptions, but more often than not, the stupidest thing a business of this size can do is borrow money. Its stressful enough for a small business in these times to be profitable. Add to that stress the need to repay a loan and success becomes far more difficult. If we want to accelerate the formation and growth of these small businesses we need to first reduce the costs imposed on them by the government (at all levels) and then simplify and reduce the costs of raising capital. Forget government loan guarantees. Make capital gains on investments up to $1mm in small companies tax free. Make this process paperwork free for the small business and a 1 page form for the investor. Thats how we will see economic and job growth in this country..

I’m not convinced paperwork is the key thing to focus on but it is certainly a valid concern.    One of the great ironies of our “pretty successful” American experience is the failure of so many to insist on better government accountability with respect to the massive spending.    People very correctly are outraged when big business screws up, but often businesses often pay the penalty they should pay for major mistakes:  the death penalty.     Bailout issues aside for now one of the reasons for the vibrancy of the American economy over some 300+ years has been our somewhat ruthless reliance on the survival of the fittest businesses.

As we move into a new era of much great Government involvement in business, I sure hope we find ways to limit the damage to American’s engines of innovation – small businesseses.

Advertisements

About JoeDuck

Internet Travel Guy, Father of 2, small town Oregon life. BS Botany from UW Madison Wisconsin, MS Social Sciences from Southern Oregon. Top interests outside of my family's well being are: Internet Technology, Online Travel, Globalization, China, Table Tennis, Real Estate, The Singularity.
This entry was posted in companies, Globalization and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Mark Cuban’s Stimulus Plan is a good idea

  1. horatiox says:

    While the govt.’s spending habits may be outrageous (especially in defense), I don’t think one can say the same about the tax rates, which are still below Clinton’s and not even close to say the 60s (LBJ, or Nixon). The teabagger types insist otherwise, but they simply don’t check the historical facts: Bush’s slashes in 2002 (including capital gains) outdid even Reagan, and while he cut taxes, he spent billions on IWE, and increased deficit exponentially (as does the bailout). Not too sound an economic policy.

    Obama and the Pelosicrats may have raised the rates on upper brackets slightly, but again, it’s not even close to 60s–like 70-80% rate on capital gains and upper brackets. That seems high, but that meant sufficient tax revenues to pay the bills. Really the US Govt. could be like California soon–nearly bankrupt and looking to other countries for loans.

    • glenn says:

      Why do you love taxes so much?

      We should go to a consumption based tax and whatever the government collects it can spend…so their outrageous approaches to things stops…if they want more tax revenue they legislate so that economy grows and more taxes are generated from higher consumption.

      A less desirable idea would be a flat tax…everyone should pay their share…either way it would be better than the insanity we have today that they call the tax code.

      And Joe…I thought you voted for Obama so he would fix ALL this stuff! Hope and Change…Hope and Change…you drank the Kool-Aid…now you find out it was laced with cyanide? That funky artificial sweetner isn’t so hot anymore?

      Where is your big blog post about Obama’s state of the union? You usually drool over the very same words that whiz past on TOTUS…what gives?

      • horatiox says:

        Assuming spending stays fairly even the Govt. can take out more loans, and deficit-spend OR they can raise taxes.
        And personally, I think there’s something wrong with mutli-millionaires who generate massive incomes merely by investment and interest.

        At some point, the financial barons schemes fail–as with Bush in 2008. That was the result of bipartisan de-reg. That doesn’t mean one supports socialism per se, but sensible regulations. Even Reagan held on to a few New Deal policies (barely). Clinton-Gingrich axed ’em.

        And many start-ups now have a problem with the SOX law–thanks to Bush/GOP. It’s a rather subtle type of corporate welfare I think, which keeps small businesses/companies down.

  2. glenn says:

    Horatiox, what about the millionares that risked everything they have, worked enormous amounts of hours, overcame huge obstacles, etc?

    Do you think the government should take 80-90% of their money?

    SOX was a disaster from day one, it has done nothing, perfect example of government regulation crafted by people that are clueless about business. That law was put in place for the lawyers and accountants to make a fortune another great special interest at work. Ever notice how the lawyer lobby is never challenged in this country?

    We need to scrap every single government program that isn’t viable or sustainable and that includes social security, etc…

    Government just isn’t an efficient place for our hard earned money.

  3. horatiox says:

    Horatiox, what about the millionares that risked everything they have, worked enormous amounts of hours, overcame huge obstacles, etc?

    Do you think the government should take 80-90% of their money?

    Yes. And most wealthy people in the US inherited their shekels, ala Paris Hilton, or the Forbes. Same for like most of the IT Barons. Sergey Brin & pals come from wealthy families (actually Russian–ie, post Gorbachev. Buy your way into Steinford U., and presto-chango: you’re a Google billionaire) The rags to riches story is a myth.

    Progressive taxation needn’t be LBJ style soak-the- rich. The highest bracket (what is it, 38% or so) is just a bit above what it was under Reagan. At 50 or 60% for the upper brackets the govt. (Fed and State) could be solvent. Not real great for IT Barons, but the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few. And property taxes as well: the CA govt’s sinking because of the old prop. 13 rates. There’s not enough money coming in. Instead, Ahhnuld cuts social programs, and raises all sorts of fees. Kick up property rates a few clicks, and the CA govt. would be on its way to recovery.

    • glenn says:

      The problem isn’t about the amount coming in…

      The problem is how they spend it, recklessly and on stupid causes to help people that shouldn’t be on the government dole.

      If you actually believe that it is ok to rob the people that risk everything to create companies to create jobs in this country…then you must hate America. You hate capitalism, you hate free markets and you hate freedom. Estate taxes are criminal – period.

      It is ludicrous to hammer the very people that stoke the economy and make things happen that is how a communist sees the world.

      The good news is that across the country that the highest percentage of voters in the most liberal states is 30% or less and in EVERY single state conservatives outnumber liberals. 2010 is going to be a bloodbath for the naive liberals and socialists in this country. There is no logical reason that liberals should ever be allowed any significant voice in this country and it is going to be great to see them extinguished from the political front.

      It is time for Americans to stop blaming everyone and everything else for their stupid decision in life, time for everyone to accept responsibility and start achieving personal liberty and achievement just like the fore-fathers intended Americans to do. Not to settle for some third rate standard of failed European countries.

      Go back and research why the Statue of Liberty was created and given to America.

      • horatiox says:

        The “death tax”, or inheritance tax was implemented like before 1800. During the Civil War, it was increased, and made an inheritance tax. Estate taxes were part of the iriginal founding: the Founders weren’t british or french aristocrats. They weren’t .

        Maybe like peruse
        some econ. data from Eisenhower. Ike kept the rates on wealthy at FDR levels: about 80% on upper brackets. Budgets were balanced, and govt. had the revenues to pay for programs. They seem a bit high, but that’s how the Keynesians ran things. You seem to think America started with like Nixon or something (even Nixon rates higher than say Clinton). It didn’t. Income taxes were voted in with 16th Amendment.

    • JoeDuck says:

      Horatiox you are going to take Paris Hilton’s money away? How will she afford new shoes?

  4. glenn says:

    Yes the death tax existed because it was viewed as a capital gain and we had no income tax. Income taxes changed all that. Our constitution allowed for taxation of capital gains and with representation.

    However an inheritance tax is double taxation and it definitely isn’t fair in any way shape or form.

    Obviously with an agenda that is only truly supported by less than 25% of the population we are certainly not be represented anymore.

    Tell you what Horatiox…come up with a viable business plan, I will fund it and I will take 80-90% of your revenue…would you do it?

    • horatiox says:

      Well, deposit the funds in my paypal, and then once we’re rolling, I’ll send you the check….Inheritance taxes were meant to prevent dynasties. Even Bill Gates Sr. approves. I do think they could penalize the middle class a bit. But certainly reasonable at Paris Hilton levels.

      16th Amendment was voted in. So, it’s the same as any legislation. Not really a popular vote, but representatives voted for it.

      Note I said progressive, glennster. I’m not a socialis,t but for wealth creation of a sort. But at some point–say 500 grand a year income or wealthy corporations, a more progressive rate should kick in. It’s unfair (not to say fiscally irresponsible) to have the top bracket start and end at what 40% (I think BO just raised it slightly on upper bracket). Reasonable taxation would say be 50% or so at 1 million, and adjusted–really I don’t worry that much about millionaires, or the wealthy doctors and lawyers in town. But when you get to like Google (or Sony or Yahoo or MSN or Walmart, Oracle etc) exec amounts of wealth, the govt. should intervene–both at corporate and individual levels. Bill Clinton, not that “liberal”, was not opposed to filing anti-trust on Micro-stuffed

      • glenn says:

        In fact Horatiox the very wealthy that has created all the jobs, etc…They should be exempt from taxes after reaching a cap. When you pay millions in taxes…it isn’t fair no matter how much money you make. Better yet put in a consumption tax so all the illegal money is taxed as well.

        We have a huge problem in this country…a very small minority thinks the government should run almost every aspect of your life. This isn’t going to work. Being a progressive puts you in a very small minority and now just like in the past the progressives have completely overstepped their bounds and have awoken a population of people that are usually too busy working, making money, doing things with their families to usually worry about the arrogance in DC and in politics.

        2010 will be a disaster for any candidate that is any way connected to progressive ideals. Progressives have caused most of the damage to this country and the majority just won’t stand for it.

        Progressives should find a country that will accept them and all their naivety and Rodney King wishes – it will never be here in America. Hopefully this debacle this year will reset American for another 80 years.

        It should be a pretty good sign that the agenda isn’t a good one when they have to lie to get people to accept it. It is amazing how often people like Obama just flat out lie…shocking.

        Krauthammer nails it.

      • horatiox says:

        Both Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were progressives. You think they were unpatriotic, or not American, Glennster? You’re wrong. That has nothing to do with Rodney King.

        Without progressives, there would have been no safe workplace laws, no health codes/inspections, no 8 hour days, no environmental/anti-pollution laws, etc. People would not be allowed to form unions legally–i.e. the right to collective bargain was due to progressives. Or is collective bargaining wrong or unAmerican too, g.

        And again, Reagan era, supply-side policies were not the official Repub. economic policy. Nixon’s taxes were about the same as JFK. Eisenhower taxed the upper bracket at like 90%. US History doesn’t start with Reagan.

    • JoeDuck says:

      Actually Glenn an interesting idea that should have more traction than it does in “free market” circles would be a 100% inheritance tax that would force kids to produce things rather than simply inherit their wealth. There are obvious problems with this and we’d see odd sheltering behavior, but it’s funny to me how much people fret over a death tax. The “rights” to inherited wealth is more of an old system feudal idea than a modern one. I think even my kids would agree (and I would agree) that it’s questionable to say kids have a basic right to their parent’s wealth.

      • glenn says:

        I am against the inheritance because it is clearly double taxation. In fact it could be argued that you should only have to pay a certain maxium in taxes in your life-time – that would force the non-paying tax suckers in our country to actually produce something as well :).

        We really need to go to a streamlined consumption based tax or a flat tax. Something that is automatic and people no longer need to fill out tax returns, etc. There is no need for it. It is just a snake pit now where people are getting totally screwed over because the tax code is so out of whack.

        Look at the key people in this administration that have had tax problems – if they can’t figure it out…how can anyone else be expected to?

        Look at Intel with an effective corporate tax rate of 14% – seriously that is nuts. A small business (which account for the vast majority of jobs in this country) can’t possibly compete with that.

        We are now the most expensive country in the world to own and run a business – THAT DOG AIN’T GOING TO HUNT!

        We would be very smart to drastically reduce corporate taxes, to spur serious job growth right NOW! We would be very smart to totally scrap our current tax code and replace it with an automatic and simple system that just happens.

        And the federal budget should be required to work within the tax revenue they collect annually. NO MORE DEFICITS, NO MORE DEBT. Look at what we have done to our country in the last 9 years and look at what has happened in the last 14 months!!! This rooster is going to come home.

  5. glenn says:

    Horatiox that just isn’t true. Progressives love to label things with names that sound good that get people to support them but the actual legislation usually has little to do with the name of the legislation.

    Teddy and Woodrow hated America just like Michelle Obama does, etc. They hate freedom, they hate freedom of choice, they like “their” group of people making decisions for YOU. Anyone that supports big government hates accountability, personal responsibility, etc…

    Let’s try something out. Take welfare, ok you can go on welfare for a maximum of 18 months, but you need to get off welfare within 18 months and when you get back on your feet and get a real job you have to pay back the money received. Gee what a novel concept?

    It is such a farce that the Democrats have always claimed they are the party of the common man when they are just as deep in the pockets of large corporations as the GOP. Both parties are horribly corrupt from these practices.

    The problem isn’t a good law or regulation to protect someone or not…the problem is when someone wrongs someone else they need to held accountable regardless of who they are, support, race, religion, etc. The problem with the Progressives is they like to whitewash anything to do with their supporters, etc…it is to the level of absurdity.

    How many examples of Holder’s decisions do you need to see it?

    They live in the perpetual opposite day…whatever they say…the opposite what they mean. Go back and listen to Pelosi’s speeches…how many times does she say something that sounds like the right thing but her actions are the EXACT opposite of what she says? It is staggering. I suggest you go back to her 2006 speech when she took control – SHOW ME ONE THING SHE HAS DONE THAT MATCHES HER SPEECH.

    Horatiox go look at the food safety act that was just passed…insanity…designed to protect the Monsanto’s of the world and screw everyone else…also designed so the UN can step in and specifically control what food you are allowed to grow, buy, eat, etc. But hey the Food Safety Act of 2009 sounds good…who wouldn’t want to protect food?

    In other news…Bernanke, Paulson, Lewis…this should be another fun scandal…

    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/02/ken_lewis_already_relishing_th.html

    • horatiox says:

      Again you show know less about US History than you do about economics. Worker’s comp was progressive, as were any number of consumer protection laws. Those would be jettisoned as well, in the RonPaul-town. So, in Paul-town, you buy a Chevy that falls apart a few weeks later. Dem’s the breaks, according to the Glennster.

  6. glenn says:

    Without progressives…10’s of millions of African children wouldn’t have died from malaria! That is a FACT.

    Without progressives the Nazi party would have never been created!

    Without progressives we wouldn’t have a failed Europe today.

    And finally a little history lesson for today. Persia was a close ally of Germany, Hitler and the Nazi party during WWII. In fact it was Hitler that suggested that Persia change it’s name. Change it to Iran…guess what Iran means in Farsi? Aryan!

  7. glenn says:

    You know Horatiox it isn’t about a few good things someone or a group has done. It is about the damage and carnage they have done along the way. So many of the policies and ideas within the progressive agenda just don’t work and in fact they typically make the situation they are trying to fix a lot worse.

    The idea that any individual on this planet should be required to give up their god-given right to life and liberty is nuts. We should allowed to be free and be required to be personally responsible for our decisions.

    Take the CRA debacle…wow what a good sounding idea…make sure everyone gets a house…like it is some kind of right. Well it didn’t work, they are doing the same thing with healthcare and it won’t work either.

    But here is the bigger problem…as soon as they find out it doesn’t work – they don’t fix it. They protect their friends, cover up the truth, demonize one the elements and most of all figure out a way to keep people voting for them.

    Sure there were problems on Wall St. But there were just as many problems on East Capitol St. and Main St. Of course we can’t persoal responsibilty and accountability on East Capitol St. Forget that. We can’t blame Main St. because they won’t vote for us.

    The entire system we have is corrupted by special interest and personal gain of the people elected.

  8. glenn says:

    World according to Horatiox…

    You want to purchase a service or good.

    You have two vendors to choose from:

    Vender A: highly efficient, profitable, great products, great services, great prices (i.e. Wal-Mart)

    Vendor B: highly inefficient (cost of goods is always at least 100% more than it should), non-profitable, corrupt, den of thieves, lousy prices and even lousier service (i.e. Govt, U.N., etc.)

    Scenario A:
    Horatiox with his hard earned money goes to Vendor A to purchase good/service.

    Scenario B:
    Horatiox gets a hold of neighbor’s wallet and decides he must purchase from Vendor B because ideologically he has a match with them.

    Horatiox listening to you, you would think that anyone who isn’t a progressive wants dangerous work places, wants slavery in the work place, etc.

    That just isn’t the case, no one wants to see anyone taken advantage of (well unless you live in an Asian culture). Worker’s comp, unemployment, etc. are all highly inefficient, corrupt systems that just don’t work. The cost of service and abuse that exists in the system are killing us.

    Take worker’s comp. That should be called disability insurance and you as an individual should choose whether to purchase it or not. If a worker is injured by his own carelessness then he should be personally responsible for the “cure”. If he is injured because the employer does not provide adequate safety, etc…then the employer should take care of it – 100%, in fact the employer should be further fined and potentially thrown in jail over it. That is how you fix it. You don’t introduce a highly inefficient process that ONLY PROMOTES corruption and waste. You actually solve the problem, you don’t have the overhead of trying to cater to a special interest, support an ideology, etc.

    It would be like a cabinet maker that decides to build cabinets by having every cabinet designed reviewed by 10 people who know nothing about cabinets, selecting a particular type of wood because as a kid he had nightmares about trees and finally using solid silver screws because he doesn’t want any werewolves buying his products.

    That is how the government does it.

    Look at the massive amount of waste in the new billion dollar + food project in Afghanistan. Less than 50% of budget goes to actual food – seriously WTF!!!! It is criminal; an independent review showed that the non-food expenses were at least 100% more than they should be.

    Government projects, the U.N., etc. just don’t work; there are much better solutions by embracing the private sector and actually working toward a solution to a problem.

    How is it that you have arrived at a place in life where you believe the government must do this?

    How is it that you believe people should get hand-outs? Anything you get fom the gov’t (i.e. welfare, unemployment, grants) should be paid back.

    Why is any of that unfair? Why is taking money from hard-working people and giving it out like candy fair?

  9. JoeDuck says:

    Could we keep both Horatiox and Glenn happy with a more innovative federal budget and tax system that spent far less, and raised somewhat less?

    Too many seem to think the Govt is solving or can solve the economic problems when I’d suggest the main thing happening now is pushing the trouble to the future and hoping for an economic miracle that is unlikely to come soon enough. We are spending enough to keep the trouble at bay for now, but this is remarkably like the approach many people took with their personal finances, borrowing from house values and spending on themselves inefficiently. At what point will the creditors/world demand that the USA start paying the piper? Seems to me it’s likely to happen gradually and will lead to inflation and shift of economic power away from us. I just hope this happens slowly and not catastrophically.

    • glenn says:

      Joe it didn’t work for personal finances…it won’t work for the Govt either.

      We have this “too big too fail” mentality, they have convinced themselves that America is just too darn big and too darn important to fail so they probably don’t care about any economic miracle – this is just plain arrogance just like the McMansion crowd.

      However they are incredibly naive if they don’t think countries like China or Russia (or their proxies) are planning to topple us from the top ranking economically in the world.

      We need a country that truly caters to the majority of voters. We need a country that will run like a compassionate, honest and fair business. We need accountability across the board, we need solutions that actually solve problems not mask them. Most importantly we need a system based on personal responsibility.

      With increased personal responsibility comes increased freedoms and increased freedoms ultimately lead to increased happiness.

    • horatiox says:

      The govt. may spend a great deal, but in comparison to other admins of the last 60 years (even GOP, like Nixon, Ike, etc) taxes are not that high. The US govt (and Cali. really) has a record deficit (if not near bankruptcy) because it’s spends billions yet at same time cuts taxes (as Bush did in 2002).

      Reagan’s tax act of ’86 may have meant bigger paychecks for the wealthy, but also reduced tax revenues greatly, over the long run. I don’t think taxes should be raised across the board (ie or middle or low income), but a higher rate on upper bracket–like 50% –would be prudent. Or just take it from the Forbes 400 white collar mobsters.

  10. glenn says:

    Horatiox let’s follow up on your support for the progressives.

    Let’s take a ride back and see just how our politicians screw us over and over again. They have this recurring pattern to legislate and word things just to get them past and then they take the next few decades and erode the previous promises and get what they want. This is exactly why we can’t trust any politician but especially the Democrats and progressives.

    Take Social Security…

    Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

    1) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,

    No longer Voluntary

    2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,

    Now 7.65%

    3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year.

    No longer tax deductible

    4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program,

    Under Johnson the money was moved to The General Fund and Spent

    5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

    Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

    Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

    A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

    Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

    A: The Democratic Party.

    Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

    A: The Democratic Party, wit h Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

    Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

    A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them even though they never paid a dime into it!

    Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

    And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! Wake up!

    • horatiox says:

      At the time of FDR’s implementation of Social Security, every Republican in the US opposed it. Some of the Demo’s acts seem a bit odd, but at least they weren’t trying to eliminate S.S., or privatize it by handing it over to JP Morgan & Co. LBJ’s act seems like an attempt to take it out of the control of the finance men and trust fund managers.

      And btw, Glennster, the GOP’s St. Ronnie (ie Reagan) raised taxes on S.S. and Medicare (ie FICA). Even St. Ronnie knew a bit about the Great Depression (courtesy of laissez-faire, speculation, and Hoover/Coolidge era repugs) and did not completely reject the New Deal.

      • glenn says:

        Why do you want to support something that isn’t sustainable?

        It is guaranteed failure! That is why we have retirement accounts, etc. There is absoutely no need for government social security. What is going to happen when SS checks start to bounce? That could be this year!

        We have to be realistic about everything. Just like people can’t buy a house they can’t possibly afford we can’t have the government administer programs that have no chance of success.

        Again…the new deal was not about solving a problem but more about pushing the progressive agenda. It seems a bit strange that every progressive idea needs to be delivered in a trojan horse…speaks volumes about the agenda.

        Have an open and honest discussion and EVERY TIME progressive ideas, schemes end up with little support in this country. You can’t overthrow the majority in America it will always fail and thank god for that!

      • horatiox says:

        The usual Non Sequitur De Glennsterius. You miss the point: for one, S.S. came out of the Great depression. The free market failed for the vast majority of citizens (as did in 2008, for that matter): they had no pensions, no health plans, no retirement. So FDR puts it in place (and some type of govt. pensions had been in place in Europe since like 17th century). The people of the US wanted it anyway (and FDR took the pres. with large majorities).

        You insist that the political problems are due to bureaucracy, taxes and regulations, when history shows that economic crisis usually results from a lack of regs and planning. What happens when banks fail, and the checks are no longer good? We might not care for the Fed. govt. but trust it a bit more than G-sachs, BoA, JPMorgan, etc. The Great Dep. and the lending crisis of 2008 were due to GOP policies, Gingrich/Clinton, de-reg, etc.

  11. glenn says:

    Here’s a novel idea…Joe you got to like this one…LOL

    Currently our country’s liability amount to $347,764.00 per citizen.

    So…

    Every citizen in the country signs a note that states that you owe the US $347,764.00. Everyone’s income is garnished at a reasonable rate until that amount is paid off. Your birth certificate is actually your note. So every kid starts out with $347,764.00 in debt.

    Every immigrant that comes into the country accepts a note for the same amount as the price of entry into our wonderful progressive eutopia!

    This way everything gets paid for. Everyone pays their fair share – even stevens across the board.

    Then when our elected idiots realize that 80%+ of the population would leave in that situation and no one would emmigrate here the might wake up to the massive problem they are causing.

    I don’t know what people are thinking when they don’t realize just how serious this problem and just how bad it is going to be. By the time Obama leaves office we could see our national debt north of $20 trillion!!! Not a fantasy…it is a realistic estimate on how this is going to snow ball.

    The stimulus bills are a joke and they have not worked and history will show they were a complete waste – so why didn’t they just reduce everyone’s tax liability by the same amount…or just give everyone the money in cash so they could spend it. Both of these scenarios would have been a more effective way to waste money.

    But we live in opposite day now…nothing makes common sense anymore (pure Alinsky!). This is how they get their insane plans passed – no one can even recognize common sense anymore.

  12. JoeDuck says:

    Glenn I do like the idea of making sure people understand how much debt the Govt is assuming on our behalf. Not sure where you are getting that number. We get $46,000 per person which is 14 Trillion / 300 Million. I think your number includes unfunded liabilities?

    But there is no movement or party that is serious about budget cutting. The Tea Party folks wouldn’t cut defense a dime, and that means no progress on budget. Sane people *must* be willing to cut the big money stuff to make a difference, and nobody is willing to do this.

    Horatiox you are making some good points about how our historical tax rates have been higher than now. However we’ve never had this kind of deficit before and I’m now very skeptical we can get out of this without another major economic crisis, probably in Obama’s second term. I think *when we spend* we need to tax to pay the piper rather than pushing the debt out to the next generation as we’ve been doing for some time.

    • glenn says:

      Joe how do you know the “Tea Party” folks won’t cut defense?

      The defense budget is now the least of our worries. Granted it should be drastically cut and we should require countries to pay us back for cleaning up their messes, etc.

      Yes I include the unfunded liabilities – why wouldn’t you? The US National Debt as of today is: $12,381,629,000,000 give or take a few billion! That comes out to $40,116 per citizen or $113,265 per taxpayer.

      But why would you leave off the unfunded part? That is exactly the depth of our problem. We all walk-around thinking we are $12+ trillion in debt when really we are over $107 trillion in debt!!! We cannot survive, we are NOT too big to fail.

      I love how the Democrats during Reagan and beyond were screaming about the deficit and the debt when Carter left Reagan with a $79 billion dollar deficit and Reagan took it just over $200 billion. The world was going to end according to the lying Democrats. Now look where we are: trillion+ deficits per year.

      If you look at Bush you see annual deficits running around a few hundred billion and if you look at the TARP fiasco we actually got a return on that…but of course the Democrats want to spend that instead of reducing the deficit!

      Obama’s deficits by year:
      09 – 1.85 trillion
      10 – 1.4 trillion
      11 – 900 billion+
      12 – 700 billion+

      And you know they will be worse…never in the future do our deficits ever get back below how bad Bush made it!!!

      This is pure insanity unless of course your motive was to destroy our country and economy so you could replace it in emergency mode.

      Joe lastly you are smoking crack if you think Obama will get a second term. Regardless of what the Democrats do this year…they are going to be wiped out in November along with any GOP that works in any way shape or form with Obama and Pelosi, Reid, etc. Obama has failed miserably as POTUS only to be outdone by even worse failure by the DNC leadership or lack thereof.

      America is finished with the charlatans.

      Keep up your hope is my only strategy mode in looking at these politicians, hang your future on every word they utter (mostly lies) and you will be hopelessly disappointed in the future.

  13. glenn says:

    Horatiox the banks fails, etc because of bad business practices sometimes driven by bad legislation from DC.

    The free markets have NEVER caused a bank to fail. The free markets have NEVER let anyone done.

    Bad people making bad decisions have ALWAYS been the culprit with the failures whether it is people like Bill Patterson at Penn Square or Barney Frank in DC…it is these people that cause the problems not a market or lack of legislation.

    Why do progressives love to blame some “thing” and look to the government to “rescue” the world? This comes down to bad people (or incompentent) and bad decisions that lead to these problems not to mention the very existence of the Fed and how they deliberately create bubbles which ALWAYS pop. It is just plain stupid how we do things.

    • horatiox says:

      The free markets have NEVER let anyone done.

      Down? The “free” market in 2008 let millions of people down. The bank and finance controlled market, G-Sachs, AIG, BoA, JP Morgan, etc let the people down when they gambled their mortgages away. Yet you are correct about one thing: the ultimate blame may not rest on even the banker-shysters, but on the politicians who set the casino rules. Which is to say the Gingrich-Gramm led Congress and their demopublican palsie Bill Clinton.

      Gramm wanted the New Deal regs removed; he wanted to allow the swaps and low-grade loans. Or rather his masters in the finance biz did, and Gramm followed orders, passed them along to Gingrich and his cronies, and Clinton signed them off (over protests of many Demos, and even a few rational GOPers).

  14. glenn says:

    All the great wisdom in our government…we have doubled world food prices because we want to force ethanol in our gasoline.

    All we have done is reduced gas mileage in cars and thus have accomplished NOTHING for the environment. This is another huge GREEN SCAM.

    Meanwhile you can go to MickeyD’s and buy a lousy meal for $1 but you can’t buy a vegetables for the same amount – no wonder our kids have long-term health issues. It is hella-expensive to feed children properly – we ought to spend actual time solving this issue as opposed to BS legislation like the 2009 Food Safety Act that doesn’t nothing address our food supply issues – another boondoggle for the huge agri-corps.

    Meanwhile Monsanto, etc. totally screw over the farmers because they are protected by the very same government regulations that Horatiox dreams about.

    We need farmers to grow food, not produce fuel. We should be managing our food supply so that truly healthful foods are available dirt cheap to the public. Not forcing our bovines to eat corn and increase the e-coli levels in our food supply.

    But of course Horatiox you probably want Obama to follow in King FDR’s footsteps and pay our farmers NOT to produce food while we have starving people in our country – hell that fits perfectly with the progressive’s agenda as defined by people like Sustein and Holdren.

    • JoeDuck says:

      Glenn, Glenn, Glenn! Ethanol, McDonalds, and the fall of Western Civilization as we know it? I like McD’s!

      Ronald McDonald in 2012!

    • horatiox says:

      We should be managing our food supply

      Sounds like …economic or social planning, Glennster. Shouldn’t the market decide? Consumers want burgers and beer, not tofu and green tea. Ergo, burgers are good! The libertarian code.

      Eeevil Ethanol! Eth has drawbacks, but oil’s running out. So a practical solution. Really, growing corn for fuel, or other crops doesn’t seem that worse than say cabbage or lettuce onion fields. Even some GOPers want alternative energy, solar, bio, wind. A small generator attached to, say, Sarah Palin’s mouth could probably pay for the power at Tea-bag Hall.

      • glenn says:

        Of course the market should decide…that was the point of my post. The bad government regulation and decisions have artificially raised the price of goods for healthful foods like produce. That is the point. Government needs to stop meddling with our food supply and let farmers grow their products (including letting water flow in CA) and stop screwing the American people over.

      • horatiox says:

        UH oh: Rachel Maddow’s after you, Glennster the AGW denier. Anyone who doubts AGW is a Neaderthal, said Miss Maddow and Bill Nye, the dude who plays a scientist on TeeVee.

        What’s funny is that during Maddow’s supposed criticism of AGW, she admits that climate change is not all man-made (well, her scientific advisers, or at least climate-expert advisers told her to). In fact, she merely says there appears to be an “anthropogenic aspect” to global warming . Or as a Kossack put it (ditto’ed by Kossack Lite Max of New Worlds):

        There is broad consensus that there is an anthropogenic component to climate change, although not quite as broad as for global warming per se. What nobody can know for sure is what fraction of change human inputs amounts to. My sense is most seem to think it is significant.

        The usual AGW rhetoric–there is a “consensus” (among who? Maddow watchers? ) , and most seem to think it is significant (not exactly statistical analysis). Though we should object to the FoxNews sorts who discount any AGW (yes, some warming may be occurring), the Maddow like flag wavers for Gore/IPCC should not be mistaken for science. They are selling the IPCC AGW ideology. And they are doing their usual ad homs as well (what, you object to Gore/IPCC? You must love Foxco! Perhaps she should say that to Freeman Dyson, Princeton physicists, and countless other AGW skeptics, not the same as deniers. They are to be found on all sides of the political spectrum)

        (maybe Mister Duck might respond to the latest AGW/IPCC/Maddow hype)

  15. glenn says:

    Speaking of great stimulus ideas…did you see what the Democrats in congress just purchased for $50,000,000 of our tax dollars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Land in St. Croix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Must be their back up plan to escape to once the American people start ransacking their homes!!!!

    Will these people ever get it? Did you notice that Murtha and Kennedy both died at the age of 77?

  16. glenn says:

    Proof Obama does not have a clue about business…

    OBAMA: The small businesses I’ve talked to and I’ve been talking to a lot of them as I have been traveling around the country, their biggest problem is right now they can’t get credit out of their banks, so they’re uncertain about that, and they’re still uncertain about orders. You know, do they just have enough customers to justify them doing more? It’s looking better at this point, but that’s not the rationale for people saying I’m not hiring. Let me put it this way. Most small businesses right now, if they’ve got enough customers to make a profit and they can get the bank loans required to boost their payroll, boost their inventory and sell to those customers, they will do so.

    It isn’t surprising since he hates capitalism, free markets and freedom. He would just assume have us all work for the government as slaves where they only excel at incompetent bumbling.

    • horatiox says:

      Why would have Obama hired G-sachs execs and Larry Sommers and agreed to the bailout, assuming he’s rabidly anti-capitalism? Does an anti-capitalist bless Reagan and entrepreneurs? Nyet. He’s a capitalist, just not the color of capitalist you’re accustomed to, glennster.

      • glenn says:

        It’s crony capitalism he love Horatiox…and that is the problem. He hates America and the free market. Anyone that love this country would not have done what he has and it trying to do.

        Crony capitalism is the crème de la crème of corruption. No wonder Obama worships people like Murtha, Kennedy, Rangel and Dodd…

      • horatiox says:

        Alright, but Bush & Co were crony capitalists as well. Enron, Exxon, Halliburton, Bechtel, etc

  17. glenn says:

    Horatiox you keep making the mistake that I was some kind of Bush supporter. I wasn’t and I am not. It was because of Bush’s corrupt approach that allowed Obama to even have a chance.

    We need to get rid of the whole lot.

    When you have people like Rockefeller saying Obama isn’t believable…come on…you know what is going on here.

    This is Chicago corruption 101.

  18. glenn says:

    Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

    Watch the videos on Obama’s site. This stuff is very disturbing but this is the propoganda machine a CO2mmunist would love. Beck calls this evil and he is right.

  19. glenn says:

    Sorry here is the correct link.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/4015237/the-one-thing-212

    This Beck video is a must watch.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s