How Will the Economic Future Unfold?

[Sailer]

Originally Posted by BaldEagle

Want to guess where this is headed?...

No Peeking You have to Guess First

RealClearPolitics

Having been in Europe and having tried to figure out some of the seemingly insane VAT tax structure, I almost like it when comparing it to our present tax system as constructed by the IRS. However, I sharply disagree with the last paragraph in the article:

"In sum, the VAT has proven an efficient way to collect revenues. No one has to love it, but just remember two things: A VAT makes everyone pay for government and lets government pay its bills."

No way. If the government (mainly Congress) refuses to live within a budget now and it spends no more than what it takes in, why would anyone think the government would do differently with a VAT in place? As long as our Congress lives the idea that it can pass whatever budget it wants, without regard to how much money it has taken in, then will will continue to have budget deficits and the government won't pay its bills. I suspect that all a VAT would accomplish is to give an illusion of more money being available, to spend.

On a side note, and I've seen this in Europe as well, a VAT encourages an underground economy even more than our present tax code. People don't buy lawn mowers, but silently barter for items without reporting them to the government. Bartering food and labor services gets especially high in this regard.

[halbhh]

Originally Posted by Sailer

I read that earlier. It was kind of expected. We borrowed all that money to make a few people happy, while making it difficult to impossible for some people to collect it, and now we have to pay it back plus the interest on it. Of course, it would be so much more fiscally responsible to cut back on the pork barrel projects. I mean, how many people really care about the sex life of a butterfly, and other equally important things? I'm sure a butterfly might care about its sex life, but it doesn't need to ask us for help. It might even be happy with a little less voyeurism from the scientists.

The quickest way to end the budget problems is simple; no deficit spending, period. If there isn't cash to pay for it, it isn't bought. Hey, that idea keeps me out of debt. No more disaster relief. I mean, if people want to live in tornado alley, on a flood plain, in the path of hurricanes, or in earthquake prone areas, let them buy their own insurance to cover the costs or suffer the consequences. No more sob stories on the TV about how someone bought a house that was vastly more expensive then they could afford and now its being foreclosed upon, and why can't the government do something to make up for their own stupidity. The list goes on, but the idea is there.

No wait, doesn't all this imply people being responsible for their decisions, that Congressmen can't promise to deliver what they can't pay for? Sorry for me trip back into stone age thinking. Don't know what came over me. One thing I do look forward to, in a sadistic sort of way, is the time our government tries to finance its deficits by selling worthless bonds to other countries and they refuse to buy. Then what, does the Fed just crank up the presses and print more worthless paper? I saw a picture the other day of a 500,000,000 dollar bill from Zimbabwe. How soon before it costs us $500 to fill our car up with gas, or more. Its only paper, after all, printed by our government.

And yes, I'm feeling a bit moody today.

$500/tank....tough one, cause about that time, I'd guess about 2020, not many people will still want to get out the old Hummer.

[halbhh]

BC and BE, more detail on the $7500 tax "credit"

The hidden tax traps in the housing-rescue bill - MarketWatch

My first thought is will take ours, invest it, etc, pay back over time at 0%, etc.

[beerandcandy]

damn it doesnt look like a credit
what the hell?

[BaldEagle]

Originally Posted by halbhh

BC and BE, more detail on the $7500 tax "credit"

The hidden tax traps in the housing-rescue bill - MarketWatch

My first thought is will take ours, invest it, etc, pay back over time at 0%, etc.

Yea I posted that link earlier but sorry I forgot you just bought a house too.

I knew it was in there when I posted the Fox News story thus the reason I called it Faux News and gave BC the wink it isn't a tax credit its just a loan.

I'd take the credit at 0% even if you have to pay it back for two reasons.
One: It's a zero percent loan which is even lower than the FED...
Two: When you pay it back you still get to deduct the payments from you gross income to reduce your taxable base. So in actuality although you pay back the $7500 you don't pay the taxes on that income so it's still a net gain.

[BaldEagle]

I recall complaining about the government being idiot's back at the start of the year when I said we were in a recession but they wouldn't even admit the possibility.

Commerce Dept. concedes U.S. economy contracted in fourth quarter - MarketWatch

The actual working definition is "a significant decline in economic activity lasting more than a few months," usually seen in GDP as well as monthly data on job growth, income growth, industrial output and business sales. All four of the monthly indicators are flashing recession signs.

And yet they bitterly cling to the there is no recession chant...
White House says U.S. avoided recession - MarketWatch

And even in the midst of economic chaos we still have some humor.
Here's a trading rule guaranteed to work - MarketWatch

[Sailer]

Originally Posted by BaldEagle

And even in the midst of economic chaos we still have some humor.
Here's a trading rule guaranteed to work - MarketWatch

That reminded me of the Nixon era, when inflation seemed a problem so a price/wage was put in place. Didn't cure a thing, but helped form an underground economy and set things up for a later recession. Doesn't matter much if the government tampers with economics and tries to guarantee no profit or no loss, the tampering will just make things worse.

And yes, I did notice how the effective date was Jan 19, 2009.

[BaldEagle]

Originally Posted by Sailer

That reminded me of the Nixon era, when inflation seemed a problem so a price/wage was put in place. Didn't cure a thing, but helped form an underground economy and set things up for a later recession. Doesn't matter much if the government tampers with economics and tries to guarantee no profit or no loss, the tampering will just make things worse.

And yes, I did notice how the effective date was Jan 19, 2009.

That was funny....

Speaking of funny did you check your WM stock today......
WaMu shares soar after Toscafund reports 6% stake - MarketWatch

WOW a 20 % rise in one day!!!!!!
Lets break that down $0*1.2 = $0

Your WM may not be out from under water but you got a little closer today. Who knows they perform like this every day for a month and you might even make money.

Now speaking of funny things here is another good one...

On help for housing, two stark views - MarketWatch

Obama would also:
-- Give a 10% "universal mortgage credit" to homeowners who don't itemize on their tax return. The credit would be worth an average of $500 to 10 million homeowners, his campaign says.

Looks like I'll be paying off my mortgage and getting a new one next year....wonder what the rate and payments are going to be for a 30 year fixed rate with a starting balance of $1.

WOW $.08 in interest for a $500 credit sounds like a great plan to me....

[beerandcandy]

with all of this crap going on
people loosing their homes/jobs the economy banks screwing up the country
you would think congress would be trying to do something to help
but nope i guess not
what in the hell is wrong with these people

Congress: No annoying airplane cell phone calls: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance

[Sailer]

Originally Posted by BaldEagle

That was funny....

Speaking of funny did you check your WM stock today......
WaMu shares soar after Toscafund reports 6% stake - MarketWatch

WOW a 20 % rise in one day!!!!!!
Lets break that down $0*1.2 = $0

Your WM may not be out from under water but you got a little closer today. Who knows they perform like this every day for a month and you might even make money.

Yes, I saw how WM did today, and if it keeps going up daily at that rate for a couple months, I'll be quite happy indeed. I'm also realistic, knowing that what goes up, will probably come down.

I don't take Wall Street too seriously, though, not after reading a story like this:

Oil company profits soar, but Exxon disappoints - Yahoo! News

What's that? Exxon posts an all time earnings record and they say "Not good enough"? What do they want, such obscene profits that the government finally takes action against it? Oh yes, despite the fact that Exxon has posted record profits, it is down from a high of 96.12 to today's close of 80.43. That's right, you have bad earnings like WM and the stock goes down. You post record high earnings like Exxon and the stock goes down. It doesn't seem to matter whether a company does bad or good, those great corporate investors on the Street can find an excuse to complain and sell.

I often wonder if the trading floor is inhabited by escapees from a mental asylum.

[BaldEagle]

Originally Posted by beerandcandy

with all of this crap going on
people loosing their homes/jobs the economy banks screwing up the country
you would think congress would be trying to do something to help
but nope i guess not
what in the hell is wrong with these people

Congress: No annoying airplane cell phone calls: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance

Congress do something? Oh that was funny...

This is probably one of their finest pieces of legislation in years because they haven't screwed up anything with it. You don't want them digging into your wallet for more taxes to run some new social program do you???

How about we get them to pass a $100M research grant to find out wht this thing is.... As if we really care.

FOXNews.com - 'Montauk Monster' Has Hamptons in a Tizzy - Science News | Science & Technology | Technology News

[BaldEagle]

From the you gotta be kidding file.....

Health Matters Blog Archive ER Doctors Give Heads-Up To Distracted Text Messagers

A press release on ACEP’s Web site cites two sobering cases, both from California: A San Francisco woman in her 20s died in March after stepping off a curb while texting and being hit by a pickup truck. A Bakersfield man in his 50s was killed as he was trying to cross the street in a similar circumstance.

I think that's just called natural selection (the stupid die).

Did you happen to see GM today....

[Sailer]

Concerning the text message writers, I think that in many ways Darwin was right. Just hope some idiot doesn't decide to make a new law about this.

Yes, I saw what happened to GM. Glad I don't own any of that stock. Oh course, I still have bad memories about the last GM car I owned, so it doesn't bother me all that much.

[BaldEagle]

Obama Calls for Opening of Strategic Oil Reserve, Windfall Profits Tax - America’s Election HQ

“We should sell 70 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks.”

“The last release of oil from the strategic reserve came in response to Hurricane Katrina, but the only crisis that has developed since Barack Obama last rejected this idea 28 days ago is a slide in his poll numbers,” he added.

Crude is down $20/bbl and now we have a crisis? Sounds more like somebody has a crisis....

[Sailer]

Its all politics as usual. McCain thinks we should drill for oil withing our own shores rather than pouring money out to other countries. So it may take 10 years to get the oil flowing. Isn't it better to start now, instead of waiting until things get worse?

Obama wants to appeal to the environmentalists, so he's trying to do something politically correct. Never mind that the oil reserve is supposed to be for emergencies, not for imagined shortages.