"Obamanomics" Obama's economc policies

[El_Machinae]

I'm not doubting that the current tide has failed to raise all boats. But if we break down the debt numbers, we could see how much each group actually 'owes'.

The system needs to change, so that we move back towards getting everyone richer (even if some do better than others). But I don't know if we should ascribe all of the previous debt to only the rich. Certainly some of the money has been used to add money to people below the median wage (and so you'd not see a boost in the median wage, even though poorer people are being helped). But, just as certainly, lots of portfolios have been padded with devalued USD in the last 5 years.

 

[Cutlass]

But why should people who saw no benefit from the debt have to pay it back?

See, this is the plan. This is the reason that "deficits don't matter" to Republicans. They plan to demand "fairness" in any deficit reduction plan. But what their version of "fairness" means is that people who received no benefit from the deficit will be forced to pay it off.

And that, boys and girls, is called a redistribution of wealth.

 

[El_Machinae]

You're making good points, I don't really disagree with the idea that it was mostly the rich who benefitted. I just think that each income group received benefit from the debt-spending, and that it's not entirely skewed towards the rich. Lots of people benefitted at the time, but only the rich got richer. But still, lots of people benefitted

And regarding "why should people who saw no benefit have to pay it back"? Well, the debt needs to be paid, and it would have to be paid even if it had benefitted no one. If the $20k cohort received 20% of the debt money, are they responsible for paying back that 20%? Or are they not responsible, because their incomes didn't rise in the longrun, but the $200k cohort got richer?

It's not an easy question about who's responsible. I think the best solution is to help rearrange the economy so that everyone's getting richer (again) and then the debt can mostly be taken care of on its own, through general buy-down. The rich (who got richer) can be expected to have some obligation for moving the system back to the proper "everyone's getting richer". Their increased wealth was certainly bought on the backs of the poor (and the debt!), and so it's okay to switch things around to make the system work again.

 

[Archbob]

Exactly, Mao tried to create a society where wealth and power was extremely concentrated and the state was owned and controlled by unaccountable and unelected elites, both localized and decentralized planning elites. Various policies were undertaken by a narrow elite at the cost of the overall population, in contradiction to all leftist ideals, which emphasize collective good and decision making. The rest of the population were slaves to the unregulated and privately owned totalitarian state. This is all my point. Maoist China was not an egalitarian society, but a radically inequal society, both in wealth and power.

Not really elites, the state was controlled by him. Well, him and his wife

Nope. Facts.

Source? Sounds like biased conjecture to me. And don't tell me it was "Common Knowledge.

But now that I've trashed your intellectully dishonest attempts to equate social democratic and liberal policies with Maoist Totalitarianism, let's return to the topic ... whatever that was.

No, you really haven't because nothing was cited, you just said a bunch of stuff, a lot of which showed you had very little knowledge to China.


And one more thing, because of these "Social Democratic and liberal policies", Europe has over a 10% unemployment rate. It doesn't have to do with taxes, more of paying too high wages to workers. Check the other thread.

 

[Archbob]

We should enact a surtax on the top income bracket equal to the rate needed to retire $8 trillion and all the interest charges on it over 20 years. The surtax does not expire until the deficit is back to $1 trillion.

Did you know that most of our debt is domestic and not foreign?

Most of the $8 trillion is actually owed to the people in the top tax bracket.

They government had to borrow money from them in order to fund its ******ed social programs and its ******ed Iraq war

Check some numbers. Only 25% of our debt is borrowed from foreigners. 75% the government had to borrow from the upper class.

So no .... The rich did not ask the government to take out a loan for them, quite the reverse.... they borrowed the government money because the government needed it ... and now the government has to pay them back.

The answer, once again, is to drop the war and cut some programs, not tax anyone more.

 

[a_propagandist]

Did you know that most of our debt is domestic and not foreign?

Most of the $8 trillion is actually owed to the people in the top tax bracket.

They government had to borrow money from them in order to fund its ******ed social programs and its ******ed Iraq war

Check some numbers. Only 25% of our debt is borrowed from foreigners. 75% the government had to borrow from the upper class.

So no .... The rich did not ask the government to take out a loan for them, quite the reverse.... they borrowed the government money because the government needed it ... and now the government has to pay them back.

The answer, once again, is to drop the war and cut some programs, not tax anyone more.

They've financed more than that.

 

[joshhh]

They've financed more than that.

Research it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

The US debt in the hands of foreign governments is 25% of the total[25], virtually double the 1988 figure of 13%

the U.S. Treasury statistics indicate that, at the end of 2006, foreigners held 44% of federal debt held by the public.

Confirmed.

 

[Princeps]

Not really elites, the state was controlled by him. Well, him and his wife

Wow. Really, so Mao and his wife ran all the governmental institutios of China alone!

Of course there where highly privileged elites: it's unavoidable in a totalitarian society, where you have people who can abuse their power without any oversight.

Source? Sounds like biased conjecture to me. And don't tell me it was "Common Knowledge. No, you really haven't because nothing was cited, you just said a bunch of stuff, a lot of which showed you had very little knowledge to China.

Well, actually, I do know about Chinese history. I just have different interpretation of it.

And one more thing, because of these "Social Democratic and liberal policies", Europe has over a 10% unemployment rate.

This is debatable, which is why it's still debated. Because, again, historical evidence doesn't really fit this interpretation. However, there's an interesting solution being promoted by the EU today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity and http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/flex_meaning_en.htm

 

[Archbob]

Wow. Really, so Mao and his wife ran all the governmental institutios of China alone!

This is not a tough task when you have most of the country worshipping you as God.

 

[El_Machinae]

Did you know that most of our debt is domestic and not foreign?

Most of the $8 trillion is actually owed to the people in the top tax bracket.

They government had to borrow money from them in order to fund its ******ed social programs and its ******ed Iraq war

Check some numbers. Only 25% of our debt is borrowed from foreigners. 75% the government had to borrow from the upper class.

Tell me about it. This stupid policy of issuing debt and then devaluing the dollar hit conservative investors the hardest. Kicked them right in the junk.

You know which cohort is the most conservative investor? The seniors. The seniors who made enough money that they have their own retirement funds and don't (or didn't) need to rely on SS or pensions. You know, those people who're doing what we want everyone to do. Bush&Co went and pulled the rug out under these people, devaluing the USD while they were switching to conservative investments, and the pulled that farce with trying to privatise SS.

The people who put away money for their retirement, and then were using that money, were kicked in the teeth.