Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,355
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 19, 2020 10:57:41 GMT -5
Record government and corporate debt risks ‘tipping point’ after pandemic passesThe United States is embarking on a rapid-fire experiment in borrowing without precedent, as the government and corporations take on trillions of dollars of debt to offset the economic damage from the coronavirus pandemic. The federal government is on its way this year to spending nearly $4 trillion more than it collects in revenue, analysts say, a budget deficit roughly twice as large relative to the economy as in any year since 1945. Business borrowing also is setting records. Giant corporations such as ExxonMobil and Walgreens, which binged on debt over the past decade, now are exhausting their credit lines and tapping bondholders for even more cash. To support such borrowing, the Federal Reserve has dropped interest rates to zero and added more than $2 trillion of loans to its portfolio in the past six weeks — as much as in the four years following the Great Recession. All this borrowing is required to plug the gaping hole the novel coronavirus has punched in the economy, as unemployment reaches levels not seen since the Great Depression. Few, if any, prominent economists or lawmakers opposed opening the government’s fiscal taps amid the current economic emergency. The Senate last month approved $2 trillion of crisis spending with a vote of 96 to 0. Complete article here: Record government and corporate debt risks ‘tipping point’ after pandemic passes
|
|
Cheesy FL-Vol
Junior Associate
"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:13:50 GMT -5
Posts: 6,686
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":""}
|
Post by Cheesy FL-Vol on Apr 19, 2020 12:29:51 GMT -5
We are up shit creek without a paddle.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 19, 2020 13:58:22 GMT -5
we have a paddle. it is sensible fiscal policy. it was in place from 1949 to about 1979.
it has not been in place since then. and this is the last big money grab we can stand.
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on Apr 19, 2020 14:10:04 GMT -5
And the dow just keeps going up...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 14:19:42 GMT -5
And the dow just keeps going up... Bigger investors are not broke.
Far from it actually.
I'm actually surprised this mega wealth redistribution is being frowned upon
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 19, 2020 14:44:26 GMT -5
And the dow just keeps going up... Bigger investors are not broke.
Far from it actually.
I'm actually surprised this mega wealth redistribution is being frowned upon
It will be interesting what the long term impact of all this distribution of money will have on the distribution of wealth in this country.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Apr 19, 2020 14:50:35 GMT -5
If republicans will not get on board with the need to raise taxes after this, there is no hope for them. They then deserve to have everything cut, and see the consequences
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 15:28:19 GMT -5
we have a paddle. it is sensible fiscal policy. it was in place from 1949 to about 1979. it has not been in place since then. and this is the last big money grab we can stand. Carter probably still kicks himself for telling everyone to put on a sweater instead of weaponizing the Fed and firing up the printing press to a ludicrous level.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 10:01:07 GMT -5
Bigger investors are not broke.
Far from it actually.
I'm actually surprised this mega wealth redistribution is being frowned upon
It will be interesting what the long term impact of all this distribution of money will have on the distribution of wealth in this country. It will be an uptick in the cost of debt maintenance for the federal government. It will also be justified as necessary to maintain stability during a pandemic. Then forgotten, like the 10 trillion spent by Obama to bring the country out of the great recession.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 20, 2020 10:10:27 GMT -5
It will be interesting what the long term impact of all this distribution of money will have on the distribution of wealth in this country. It will be an uptick in the cost of debt maintenance for the federal government. It will also be justified as necessary to maintain stability during a pandemic. Then forgotten, like the 10 trillion spent by Obama to bring the country out of the great recession. Yeah, that "distribution of wealth" topic wasn't going to go well. So, better to go with your good old standby.
|
|
deminmaine
Administrator
Politics admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:01:55 GMT -5
Posts: 13,146
|
Post by deminmaine on Apr 20, 2020 10:11:36 GMT -5
we have a paddle. it is sensible fiscal policy. it was in place from 1949 to about 1979. it has not been in place since then. and this is the last big money grab we can stand. Carter probably still kicks himself for telling everyone to put on a sweater instead of weaponizing the Fed and firing up the printing press to a ludicrous level. I know you're joking, but I still gotta say- Carter is a bigger man than that. Although maybe the cardigan was a mistake, lol.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 10:18:22 GMT -5
It will be an uptick in the cost of debt maintenance for the federal government. It will also be justified as necessary to maintain stability during a pandemic. Then forgotten, like the 10 trillion spent by Obama to bring the country out of the great recession. Yeah, that "distribution of wealth" topic wasn't going to go well. So, better to go with your good old standby. I don't have a "good old stand by". I give pertinent examples. If you don't like the possible answer to a financial topic, don't ask the question. You really need to get out of your social guidance box once in a while. To me you seem quite limited on economic/financial matters in general.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 20, 2020 10:43:48 GMT -5
Yeah, that "distribution of wealth" topic wasn't going to go well. So, better to go with your good old standby. I don't have a "good old stand by". I give pertinent examples. If you don't like the possible answer to a financial topic, don't ask the question. You really need to get out of your social guidance box once in a while. To me you seem quite limited on economic/financial matters in general. I don't see where i ask a question.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 10:49:33 GMT -5
I don't have a "good old stand by". I give pertinent examples. If you don't like the possible answer to a financial topic, don't ask the question. You really need to get out of your social guidance box once in a while. To me you seem quite limited on economic/financial matters in general. I don't see where i ask a question. Your right. Your premise of "not going well" was actually being addressed. Your perception/opinion is your own. On financial topics, your opinion is next to worthless to me.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Apr 20, 2020 10:54:34 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 10:57:56 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 20, 2020 11:02:51 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. that might be true, but they pay SS, MC, excise, sales, property, etc......
it turns out that they pay more in net taxes (percent-wise) than many wealthy people do.
are you advocating against the progressive tax system? if so, you should explain that.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 20, 2020 11:04:25 GMT -5
I don't see where i ask a question. Your right. Your premise of "not going well" was actually being addressed. Your perception/opinion is your own. On financial topics, your opinion is next to worthless to me. You mentioned distribution of wealth. I posted it will be interesting see how the current events will impact that. You quoted me and then responded with things that had nothing to do with distribution of wealth including your usual "Obama". I just thought you had intentionally dropped any mention of distribution of wealth as not something good to follow up on. If I am wrong, please quote this and discuss that topic. Or redirect. Or attack me personally. Or just ignore me since I'm not worthy of your attention. Whatever makes you happy. I will be back a bit later.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Apr 20, 2020 11:04:50 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. And the wealthy are only, at best, the top 10% of the country. So you have 40% of the country that aren't wealthy that are paying for a lot of this "distribution". Wealth distribution would be the top 10% (or less) paying for 100% of it. The wealthy will pay for a portion of this but it's certainly not coming all from them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 11:07:24 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. that might be true, but they pay SS, MC, excise, sales, property, etc......
it turns out that they pay more in net taxes (percent-wise) than many wealthy people do.
are you advocating against the progressive tax system? if so, you should explain that.
We could go on forever on how big the many is. I'll just say I'm not advocating against the current system. That's why I never complain about it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 20, 2020 11:08:21 GMT -5
It will be interesting what the long term impact of all this distribution of money will have on the distribution of wealth in this country. It will be an uptick in the cost of debt maintenance for the federal government. It will also be justified as necessary to maintain stability during a pandemic. Then forgotten, like the 10 trillion spent by Obama to bring the country out of the great recession. half of it will not be forgotten. it was completely unnecessary.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 20, 2020 11:09:09 GMT -5
that might be true, but they pay SS, MC, excise, sales, property, etc......
it turns out that they pay more in net taxes (percent-wise) than many wealthy people do.
are you advocating against the progressive tax system? if so, you should explain that.
We could go on forever on how big the many is. I'll just say I'm not advocating against the current system. That's why I never complain about it. no, we could not.
many is more than "few".
see how easy that is?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 6:32:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 11:09:21 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. And the wealthy are only, at best, the top 10% of the country. So you have 40% of the country that aren't wealthy that are paying for a lot of this "distribution". Wealth distribution would be the top 10% (or less) paying for 100% of it. The wealthy will pay for a portion of this but it's certainly not coming all from them. As an absolute, it will never come from "all" of tnem. I thought I had that covered with the certain situations statement.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Apr 20, 2020 11:41:05 GMT -5
And the wealthy are only, at best, the top 10% of the country. So you have 40% of the country that aren't wealthy that are paying for a lot of this "distribution". Wealth distribution would be the top 10% (or less) paying for 100% of it. The wealthy will pay for a portion of this but it's certainly not coming all from them. As an absolute, it will never come from "all" of tnem. I thought I had that covered with the certain situations statement. That has zero to do with what you quoted. My point is you can't call it wealth distribution if people who are not wealthy are paying for a chunk of it. If it was only wealthy paying for it even if it wasn't all of them (those exceptions to paying taxes that your certain situations statement was about) - sure call it wealth distribution. But when a large portion of those paying taxes would not be considered wealthy at all then it's not a wealth distribution. A distribution of money, sure, but not wealth since a lot of people paying for it aren't wealthy.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,365
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Apr 20, 2020 12:17:11 GMT -5
He likes to play this semantics game so he doesn't have to actually answer the question, then goes on about how the answer doesn't interset him. Perfect way out of any discussion
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,372
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 20, 2020 12:43:59 GMT -5
Billionaires should be prepared for new tax rates. Their lifestyles won't change, even a little, but they are the only ones who can save the USA.
I also don't buy the bs that they will take their money and leave. There are plenty of countries who have lower tax rates than we do, and they havent gone to any of them.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 20, 2020 13:33:11 GMT -5
Billionaires should be prepared for new tax rates. Their lifestyles won't change, even a little, but they are the only ones who can save the USA. I also don't buy the bs that they will take their money and leave. There are plenty of countries who have lower tax rates than we do, and they havent gone to any of them. FDR managed to convince the rich to pay for WW2 and massive social programmes. it wasn't easy. he did it by basically telling them that the working class would rise up and climb over the fences and rape and pillage the rich if they didn't. it worked.
the only thing that would make Trump or the GOP do that would be to lobotomize every one of them. our leadership is a fistful of spineless toadies who wouldn't know what is best if it ran over them.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,372
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 20, 2020 15:40:59 GMT -5
Billionaires should be prepared for new tax rates. Their lifestyles won't change, even a little, but they are the only ones who can save the USA. I also don't buy the bs that they will take their money and leave. There are plenty of countries who have lower tax rates than we do, and they havent gone to any of them. FDR managed to convince the rich to pay for WW2 and massive social programmes. it wasn't easy. he did it by basically telling them that the working class would rise up and climb over the fences and rape and pillage the rich if they didn't. it worked.
the only thing that would make Trump or the GOP do that would be to lobotomize every one of them. our leadership is a fistful of spineless toadies who wouldn't know what is best if it ran over them.
I am afraid the huddled masses will rise up. They don't have much to lose. They can't afford healthcare. Their working conditions stink and they can barely make ends meet. Our society treats workers like dog poop. Hopefully we can repair that a little before they get too frustrated. By the way, supposedly the great times were when labor unions were strong and tax rates on the rich were very high. So, I'm pretty sure they aren't talking about jobs and the economy when they said "Make America Great Again". It was just an era when non-white people knew their place and kept their mouths shut.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 20, 2020 16:37:20 GMT -5
FDR managed to convince the rich to pay for WW2 and massive social programmes. it wasn't easy. he did it by basically telling them that the working class would rise up and climb over the fences and rape and pillage the rich if they didn't. it worked.
the only thing that would make Trump or the GOP do that would be to lobotomize every one of them. our leadership is a fistful of spineless toadies who wouldn't know what is best if it ran over them.
I am afraid the huddled masses will rise up. They don't have much to lose. They can't afford healthcare. Their working conditions stink and they can barely make ends meet. Our society treats workers like dog poop. Hopefully we can repair that a little before they get too frustrated. By the way, supposedly the great times were when labor unions were strong and tax rates on the rich were very high. So, I'm pretty sure they aren't talking about jobs and the economy when they said "Make America Great Again". It was just an era when non-white people knew their place and kept their mouths shut. Revolutions tend to happen not at the lows but when things are improving but expectations are increasing at a greater rate, according to one of my college professors.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,372
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 20, 2020 16:43:46 GMT -5
I am afraid the huddled masses will rise up. They don't have much to lose. They can't afford healthcare. Their working conditions stink and they can barely make ends meet. Our society treats workers like dog poop. Hopefully we can repair that a little before they get too frustrated. By the way, supposedly the great times were when labor unions were strong and tax rates on the rich were very high. So, I'm pretty sure they aren't talking about jobs and the economy when they said "Make America Great Again". It was just an era when non-white people knew their place and kept their mouths shut. Revolutions tend to happen not at the lows but when things are improving but expectations are increasing at a greater rate, according to one of my college professors. Interesting. Propaganda is so easily and effectively disseminated these days. The key is to keep the poor people divided. If they are busy fighting each other, and blaming different issues and leaders, they can't organize any decent effort. Trump is super good at dividing, so maybe we are stable for a bit.
|
|