The Capitalist System Is Facing Its Worst Crisis Ever

i dont believe that for a second

 

So you assume that the "market" forces dont exist in high tax environments ?

Taxes are by design, a tool to drive behavior. Why cant you drive behavior with corporate tax codes ?

I'll save you the time. You can. That is exactly what corporate lobbyist use when writing bills that falsely inflate the cost of entry into the marketplace, and limit competition. Do you honestly think that Walmart can sell the same chinese goods as Bobs Bargain Barn, and do it at 20% of the cost without the tax breaks and incentives they receive from state and local governments ? Why do you think 3/4 of the Amazon RPF was required tax breaks when they were looking to build a new hub ?

 

Which rules forced "these institutions to take on bad loans" ?

 

Saw this a while back in the news. Unlike here in the US, their people in Italy are blaming China for this global catastrophe, whereas CNN, Pelosi, Schumer, MSNBC, and Maddow all want to blame Trump.

 

The trouble is the workers have no idea how to run a reasonably sized enterprise. And there are too many of them and they all have competing ideas and competing interests. Are the warehouse workers expected to vote intelligently on where to put Amazon's next data center.

What if the data center workers want to replace all the warehouse workers with robots?

The trouble with ideologues is that they are ideological. They think they can understand the world through slogans.

 

Under the Clinton administration.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as govt sponsored enterprises, immune from bankruptcy,
were instructed to take on bad debts by the US Congress.
Alan Greenspan said this a "noble experiment"
And that's what it was, an experiment.
This created "moral hazard" which other institutions had to handle. By spreading the risk
it caused a meltdown. Companies "too big to fail" were bailed out - and well and good as
they were forced to take on these loans in the first place.

THE REAL CORRUPTION IS THE DENIAL AND IGNORANCE OF THESE FACTS.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-credit-crisis.asp

 

They do equality, wealth distribution, workers rights, democracy, environment better too.
Not.

 

Lenin says the role of Socialism is to prepare for Communism.
Man has never created a more perfect political system for
concentrating power in the hands of the few - or the one.

 

It was called the “Community Reinvestment Act” championed by folks like Barney Frank which requires banks to show that they were offering loans to underserved communities to people who otherwise NEVER would have qualified for a loan.

 

It isn't the system in crisis. It is the economy itself that is in crisis. Why? Government meddling. And you want government to run everything. Amazing.

 

First of all a competitor won’t just come in and take their place because you have raised the barriers of entry for him to do so with your increased tax. Now he, just like his predecessor, is going to have to price that tax increase into his business model in order to run his business. And to do so he’s going to use inferior materials, inferior labor or increased price.

Second of all, you attack billionaires as if they’re not using they’re money. Let’s assume we do what you just spoke about and we take 100% of the funds over a billion. Who is going to invest in research and development? For instance, to bring ONE drug to market takes nearly 20 years worth of manpower and $2.3Billion on average. And this does not take into account the tens of thousands of man hours and BILLIONS of dollars spent on drugs that fail given the fact that less than .5% of drugs make it to pharmacy shelves.

Who is going to be willing to spend that amount of money and take on THAT much risk when you’re stealing their profits from them?

 

This is false, if we are “taxing the rich” the new company or perhaps numerous new companies will escape this tax.

Companies have the ability to take what are called deductions, the R&D exemption as per IRS guidance allows firms to deduct all R&D expenses in a single year instead of amortizing as a capital expense.

Or do you think “the rich” self fund R&D?

Maybe brush up on what you are talking about. We have not been discussing corporations we have been discussing “the rich”.

I have no issue when money and cash flow is in circulation, it is when “the rich” place the wealth concentration they have acquired and place it into savings accounts — or worse, move it to tax havens. It pulls that money out of the market making everyone less well off.
Which is why we shouldn’t allow this level of concentration to begin with.

 

The economy was, for the most part ok until horse and sparrow economics (aka trickle down) was embraced as the best way to grow the economy.

Since then, we have been losing ground to other nations while seeing the largest level of income and wealth inequality in our nations history. Now we have to bail out large corporations once a decade...

 

It’s not false. Do you have any idea how much it costs to start up a pharmaceutical business? You’ll still be taxing the rich, just a different rich person until he decides it’s not worth it either and invests his money elsewhere.

And you’re pretending as if the rich and their businesses are separate entities. While they are legally separate, the amount you tax the rich incentivizes them to either stay in your economy or go elsewhere. And when they leave they take their money and business with them along with the jobs and products they produce.

 

You are seizing on one industry which is not what we are discussing. We are discussing personal wealth. My example was for illustrative purposes, I was not saying we need to specifically do it this way — it would have to be much more nuanced.

If money is reinvested into the company companies do not pay taxes on the amounts spent.

Companies are already leaving to third world nations. I am so tired of this mantra that we have to let them keep all of their money, they require subsidies, tax breaks, spend vast amounts of money lobbying the government to shut down their competition — all at the cost of sucking every last cent they can out of our economy. If they want to shut down their doors to the largest economy on the planet — fine, they will be replaced.

Where are they going to go? Most other developed nations already have higher effective tax rates than we do and the rest have unskilled, uneducated workforces in areas that have poor infrastructure and massive corruption.

 

Trickle down is how capitalism works and has always worked. We have been gaining ground over other nations. Inequality results not from capitalism but from globalism. American workers have to compete with lower income workers in other countries. We do not have to bail out companies and should never do that. You are 100% wrong. Sorry.

 

So capitalism only works when it is in a controlled ecosphere? That isn’t capitalism.

Capitalism is companies sending their factories overseas and sourcing materials and workers at the least expensive margin and then selling it at massive profits. Americans having to complete on a global scale is capitalism.

As for us not having to bail out companies, I agree — we don’t have to — but they have become “too big to fail” or have paid off the correct politicians so we do. That isn’t capitalism.

Horse and sparrow isn’t always how capitalism worked and “Some studies suggest a link between trickle-down economics and reduced growth.[1][2] A 2019 study in the Journal of Political Economy found, contrary to trickle-down theory, that “the positive relationship between tax cuts and employment growth is largely driven by tax cuts for lower-income groups and that the effect of tax cuts for the top 10 percent on employment growth is small.[3]”

“You are 100% wrong. Sorry.”

 

No, they won’t be replaced. They’ll do EXACTLY like what they did in Venezuela and leave your sorry country and your pathetic economic policies which destroyed the 4th best economy in the world after less than 15 years.

They will leave your ass eating rats and throwing your money in the gutter begging them to come back.

 

The GSE have always been required to buy the debt, thats what GSE's do. They provided liquidity to a market that could not grow without them. But to say they were required to take on "bad debt" is just false. They were required to take on DEBT. The debt didn't become "bad" until congress gave the private sector free reign to make it bad debt. And again I ask, which Clinton era law made them take on "bad debt" ?

There were bad deals made by mortgage companies, ninja loans etc, that were then bought by the banks who then securitized them in very complex vehicles that were literally not worth the paper they were written on, who then got the rating agencies (Moodys, Standards and Poors, and Fitch) to back their false products so that they COULD be sold to Fannie and Freddie. Nobody denies these things happened in the housing crisis, these are just facts. So ask yourself this simple question: Why did they need to lie about their products at all of these levels, if Fannie and Freddie had to take the loans anyway ? I'll answer that for you, they had to lie because the GSE's had stable rules that were working. Every bad step in the process that caused the failure was based on greed in the PRIVATE sector.

Im not saying that the GSE are the the only answer, but to blame them for the housing crises is beyond disingenuous. Everything that came out of all of the investigative committees in congress, and in the private sector laid the blame on the crises on the private sector.

Yes, Greenspan didn't agree with GSE's. But Greenspan was wrong on a lot of things, and he is entitled to his opinion. Hell, Greenspan once said "The fed gets their forecasts wrong about 60% of the time". And since he was the one who kept lowering rates, guess he shares a pretty big chunk of the blame right ? I am pretty sure long term rates went from like 6% to 1% under his watch right ?

 

Show me where the CRA requires loans to people that are low credit or low income ?

I'll save you the time. The CRA has nothing to do with WHO is borrowing the money, it is solely based on where the property is

 

Yeh, that totally had nothing to do with rampant corruption, a dictatorship, tying their economy to highly volatile oil commodities, subsidies and price controls. It was all because they taxed the super rich!

PS: Their individual tax rates are not even in the top

Thanks for that pathetic attempt at revisionist (or maybe just ignorant) fearmongering.

 

Capitalism is dying! We need an authoritarian, communist dictatorship to save us.

Where are our modern day Maos and Stalins when we need them?!?

 

..................WARNING !
...... Beware & Be Aware

....

.

 

The Michigan governor's office.

 

It is too obvious that you have done NO INVESTIGATION into workers' co-ops. You think "worker control" means a free-for-all with EVERYONE taking time to vote on EVERY little thing. Look into it. Until you do you know nothing about it.