SIMPLE Solution to Fix the Economy

...............

 

Next time instead of a straw man find a bulls eye.

 

Yeah right the two fastest growing regions in American and no one wants to live there according to Mr. Beggs. Ignorance for the win.

The point is that this could be happening everywhere if it weren't for overy restrictive rules and regulations and crazy ass leftist politicians.

The problem with your solution is that it simply kicks the can down the road a bit. the same nitwits who maxed out their credit cards in six months will just do it again at their next opportunity. You simply are teaching them that Uncle Sam will bail you out no matter how little self control you have.

 

Welfare is not suffocating this economy at all... yet you use the opportunity to inject "government is too big" into a post, which has no relevance whatsoever. The size of the government has nothing to do with a stagnant economy. You earned your strawman.

 

By percentage, not by total growth in population. You can't pay most people in this country enough to move to frickin North Dakota.

Leftist politicians prioritize the rights and services of people over businesses. Right wing politicians do the opposite. Take your pick. More people are living in "left leaning" states, earning higher incomes, and receiving better education than right-leaning states.

 

How many more people getting paid not to work can our economy handle? Nearly 1 trillion sucked out of the economy for welfare each year.

 

Yeah more people are living there. The overwhelming majority can't get away and the rest of them apparently like being reamed. In the mean time any working man who can't find a job where they are at should consider heading to Midland Texas or ND. You'll make substantiall more than where your at even if it's burger flipping.

They might make make more but they get to keep a hell of a lot less.

 

Where does the government get the money to bail out anybody? If it from the people through taxes, then nothing has changed except the people who made the bad decisions get a free ride from the people who didn't. Where does the idea that money from the government is free or unearned come from? I don't see where this would enhance consumer spending in the least. It would only change who is doing the spending. Poor people should live as poor people, then maybe there would be an incentive to make a living. If you wouldn't go to ND to work, it is only because someone else is taking care of you. If you were starving, you would hitch hike to ND. Take care of yourselves, I say. It is not my obligation and I don't feel sorry for any of you. There, I said it.

 

Good for them.

In the grand scheme of things, most people don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about ideology when it comes to where they reside. People (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about taxes and spending but stay in states with higher taxes and "spendthrift" governments. Why?

Wages are higher, services are better, people are more educated, and dammit there is just more to do.

You will not convince people from major world class metros such as Boston, New York, San Francisco Bay, Chicago, DC, etc. to move to North Dakota or bumble(*)(*)(*)(*) Texas, regardless of how much money they may "save." Welcome back to reality.

- - - Updated - - -

State governments rely on taxation for operation.. so yes, they are funded by tax revenue taken out of the economy or by Federal bailouts.

However, most poeple don't realize that the Federal government controls the money supply, and is not dependent on taxation for financial operation. It simply prints the money, then controls interest rates and taxation to keep the money supply as close to its annual inflation target as possible.

 

Show me the numbers on the white house budget sheet.

 

So I think I posted, but I'm still waiting to hear how you can justify these proposals. Tell me why someone who earns 50k/yr and spends frivolously deserves a government bail out, and someone who earns 50k/yr and scrimps and saves deserves to foot the bill. I doubt you can explain this. Someone like me, who busted their balls to pay for their college and has never had a car loan (but had bought 2 cars), never had more than a few thousand in college loans, deserves to get shafted while someone who wasn't responsible with their money deserves a bunch of free cash.

 

Deserving is irrelevant. You clearly didn't read the OP. I suggest you read it again.

Bail out the people, economy explodes in productivity and GDP.

OR

Continue to let ideological purity strangle the entire world and drain the economy of every country on this planet.

 

Oh I see. We don't need fairness, justice, or equality under the law. All should worship the most serene, the almighty economic growth.

W/e kid. You don't care about justice, fairness, equality, liberty - you don't care about American values.

 

I think you could do both. You could bail out those who need it and that would pump the economy for growth, demand for goods and services, and get productivity back to where it should be in order to employ the masses.

On the flip side, let those who got bailed out foot the bill. Once they're free of financial burdens, allow them to pay higher taxes than those who got/took no bailout. You get to pay lower taxes for living within your means and those who did not can then afford more in taxes as a result while using the rest of their new money to create demand within the economy. I'm thinking the number of people needing no bailout would be much lower than those who do since household debt is around 80% of GDP so it would be worth it to incentivize those who scrimped and saved in order to be able to have a debt reset for those who didn't.

 

What you're talking about is a roundabout way of making people take a government sponsored debt consolidation loan. Its at least better than what the op suggests.

 

In some way I suppose it could be, but the reality is you'd have to do something to give people their incomes back so they're not using the majority of it to just service their monthly debt payments. Instead they'd have free money to buy goods and services, which even for less wealthy workers would enable them to buy more without a rise in income, or even promote some savings where today there is little for the middle and lower classes. So long as a lot of money goes back into the economy via demand, more people can work and that leads to more growth. I just like the idea that some could enjoy "lower" taxes by not needing the bailout and those who required it would always carry an additional tax burden for being brought out of their situation by the government. That's how to treat people fairly instead of penalizing those who don't need it and rewarding those who need it with a free bailout.

The concern would be regulation on credit. Somehow this world has to grip how much available credit an individual can obtain. The days of just making it readily available would have to end.

The only concern with calling it government sponsored debt consolidation "loans" is that people wouldn't be paying it back. Yes, their taxes would increase to cut yearly deficit spending by increasing taxes on those who took bailouts, but it would be necessarily to get rid of the debt that was created to bail them out. Sure, some would go to servicing that debt, but the answer to the national debt isn't something I'd be concerned with unless we continued to increase it beyond our ability to service it.

 

I dont care about your white house budget sheet, but I will cite it:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html

 

But again, you're talking about giving to those who 'need' a bailout because they were irresponsible. Yeah, there's always an outlier, but in most cases two people who at 18yo have the same income don't diverge because of misfortunes, it's because of the actions they take. One (like myself) doesn't spend money they don't have, many others spend whatever they can finance and then find themselves in that bad situation. It's rare that people really are spending so much of their money on such useless debt, but if they are then hey - there's always bankruptcy. And what's so horrible about bankruptcy? Well, you basically won't be able to finance jack for a few years, but if someone's in that bad of a situation financially, that'd probably be good for them. I've barely financed a thing in the six years since I graduated high school. The total loans I've taken over nearly seven years since graduating are only 14k, and I've paid them off in as little as 1-2 months (wasn't paying that close attention).

Yes, that would be essentially be a debt consolidation loan. You said that those who get bailed out would pay more in taxes, and those who didn't would pay less. :/ The end result is little different from just giving out government debt consolidation loans, which would actually be a decent proposal. Not great, but not horrible either. Just assuming everyone's debt? yeah, fooking horrible idea.

- - - Updated - - -

But again, you're talking about giving to those who 'need' a bailout because they were irresponsible. Yeah, there's always an outlier, but in most cases two people who at 18yo have the same income don't diverge because of misfortunes, it's because of the actions they take. One (like myself) doesn't spend money they don't have, many others spend whatever they can finance and then find themselves in that bad situation. It's rare that people really are spending so much of their money on such useless debt, but if they are then hey - there's always bankruptcy. And what's so horrible about bankruptcy? Well, you basically won't be able to finance jack for a few years, but if someone's in that bad of a situation financially, that'd probably be good for them. I've barely financed a thing in the six years since I graduated high school. The total loans I've taken over nearly seven years since graduating are only 14k, and I've paid them off in as little as 1-2 months (wasn't paying that close attention).

Yes, that would be essentially be a debt consolidation loan. You said that those who get bailed out would pay more in taxes, and those who didn't would pay less. :/ The end result is little different from just giving out government debt consolidation loans, which would actually be a decent proposal. Not great, but not horrible either. Just assuming everyone's debt? yeah, fooking horrible idea.

 

I know what you're saying, but it's not an assumption of everyone's debt. I meant a reset...poof, gone. Then just bailout the banks to keep them afloat and let the processes begin again under some better regulations. No debt consolidation and you'd pay higher tax rates until you pass away if you take the reset so those who didn't need it could at least feel a sense of reward by having lower taxes than those who needed help. Those higher taxes would close our deficit spending, maybe even put us on a path to paying down debt slowly by having a bit of surplus each year.

 

Don't preach to me about justice, fairness, and all the other emotional pompous rhetoric you conservatives have bought into. You know this world, and this country are NOT fair. You don't even treat the president with same amount of respect and standards of criticism as other presidents. Cut the bull.

I don't think self-righteousness is worth the global economy going to (*)(*)(*)(*). Self-righteousness won't prevent the anarchy that comes with a collapsed global economic system. If the major powers don't fix their private debt problem, the economies will continue to suck, income inequality will continue to rise, and tensions between the poor and rich will come to a head. If you want to see what happens when the wealthy become too powerful and own the entire country, take a stroll to the Middle East warzones.

 

Excuse me? Did you actually post this and mean it?

Ahem! Aaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha!

Jesus! I invite you to consider nearly five years worth of pretty much open ended, government funded witch hunt style investigations into both the personal and private lives of BOTH Bill and Hillary Clinton followed by an impeachment over having been caught lying about a PERSONAL affair that had absolutely nothing to do with the running of the Executive Branch.

These mentally blinkered and utterly fanatical Obama supporters . . . sheesh!

Oh and you are also invited to consider that G.W. Bush was called Dumbya, the Shrub, Warmonger, EVIL, Hitler reborn, Red Neck, Coward, Military deserter . . . and so forth. Compared to both Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush your Lord God savior on Earth, Barack Obama has been handled with kid gloves by the mainstream media.

 

There is nothing funny about it. The funny part is most of America (and the rest of the world) can see it but you are too brainwashed to notice.

Ahem! Aaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha!

Obama has been a terrorist, Muslim, communist for 5 years.

Denial is strong with you, Gatewood.

 

I take it then that you have not been paying attention to the general nature of the increasingly angry criticism that Barack Obama has been receiving from leaders around the world for the last couple of years and have not been paying attention to polling numbers throughout all of 2013 which dramatically showed extensive voter's remorse among millions of FORMER Obama supporters. Why? Because Obama is a total incompetent as president and his lovely little ObamaCare law is screwing up massive numbers of citizen voters of BOTH parties.

Meh . . . but don't blame me. I voted for Hillary in 2008.

 

World leaders never like us... we stoop around in their affairs.

The Republicans have obstructed his government in every possible way for 5 years. Yes, I'm blaming it on them. When you don't compromise worth a damn, post misinformation, and turn on your OWN health care law, you disrupt an entire administration.

Don't even get me started on the Tea Party IDIOTS pushing for Austerity, which has ROBBED the US of economic recovery.

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

Everyone who has lost their insufficient health insurance coverage can purchase it under Obamacare.

No one cares who you voted for. You obviously voted for the wrong person and are bitter about it. Obama isn't going anywhere. Five years later you still can't accept it.

What is your excuse? Lost of white privilege? Fear of socialism? Succumbing to propaganda? Jealousy? All of the above?

 

I am tired of you playing the forking Race Card all the damn time because of your blind hatreds. You are on my ignore list for now.