@jdb is there anything in those numbers he posted that are incorrect? I don't care about his market projections. Every asshole has an opinion on the market future, most are wrong.
I'm pointing out his flair for dramatics. I haven't fact-checked any of those stats and don't plan to. I don't think the economy is humming by any stretch - just pointing out that he's no different than Tyler Durden.
Hey, we could be Canada
-- attachment is not available --
@twenty Canada had even more migration then the U.S. and they're economy is sh#t. Do you still buy the mass migration is good for economies narrative?
@snarlcakes Canada's economy is heavily reliant on US trade, and that's obviously not working out well for them right now being in a trade war (nor us, for that matter). Their tech industry is miniscule and basically amounts to training people that then come work in the US.
@larsiu hate to break it to you, but they can print their way out of it. And that's what they're going to do. I'd argue they're already a doing it.
Side note, the first party to cut incomes taxes for the bottom 50-75% of society wins the next couple of election. Labor has been getting slaughtered for a couple decades now and that trend looks to only be accelerating with AI.
Cut what taxes? The bottom 50% have less than a 5% effective income tax rate.
@larsiu hate to break it to you, but they can print their way out of it. And that's what they're going to do. I'd argue they're already a doing it.
Side note, the first party to cut incomes taxes for the bottom 50-75% of society wins the next couple of election. Labor has been getting slaughtered for a couple decades now and that trend looks to only be accelerating with AI.
Cut what taxes? The bottom 50% have less than a 5% effective income tax rate.
You are kind of making my point. It generates little revenue (overall) and it would grant some relief to the working and middle classes. My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
@bar-down crazy, but I see it even in our local micro real estate market. The rental houses I have that are in middle class areas of town have flat lined in value increases over the last few years.
A house I sold in early 2022 (3x what I bought it for in 2016) was sold again this spring for only a few grand more than 4 years ago. And sat for awhile with a lot of price reductions.
Meanwhile the upper end of the market around here just keep going higher, and most places still selling really quickly. Prices are way above where they were 4 years ago.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
@larsiu hate to break it to you, but they can print their way out of it. And that's what they're going to do. I'd argue they're already a doing it.
Side note, the first party to cut incomes taxes for the bottom 50-75% of society wins the next couple of election. Labor has been getting slaughtered for a couple decades now and that trend looks to only be accelerating with AI.
Cut what taxes? The bottom 50% have less than a 5% effective income tax rate.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
In fairness, you can argue this about much of the developed world. Look at European (France, Italy, UK) and Japanese debt-to-GDP (double ours).
No politicians will touch SS and Medicare, and society isn't willing to accept the fact that spending hundreds of thousands per year on Grandpa and Grandma isn't fiscally sensible.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
Things we could do:
Raise the SS cap
Single Payor (with AI to diminish administrative bloat). Sorry docs. You're taking a haircut.
Reduce the deficit so that interest payments on government debt aren't exceeding 6% of GDP.
We almost can't cut spending in any meaningful way outside of the military. Our entire society and economic model is based on getting SS at 62-70 and medicare at 65. those are promises made. Can't rug pull now. No way.
Like I said earlier, the only way out may be through a radical change fueled by AI. The cost of labor will be so cheap that taxing it won't do shit anyway.
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
Things we could do:
Raise the SS cap
Single Payor (with AI to diminish administrative bloat). Sorry docs. You're taking a haircut.
Reduce the deficit so that interest payments on government debt aren't exceeding 6% of GDP.
We almost can't cut spending in any meaningful way outside of the military. Our entire society and economic model is based on getting SS at 62-70 and medicare at 65. those are promises made. Can't rug pull now. No way.
Like I said earlier, the only way out may be through a radical change fueled by AI. The cost of labor will be so cheap that taxing it won't do shit anyway.
Say you raise the SS cap from 185 to 250. Who gets hurt? Not as much the people pulling in mid to high six figures. Hardly at all those demanding salaries in the millions. It's the people making between $185-$250K who see a lot of their income go out the door.
ie. the upper middle class. And if that's the Democrats platform, "Tax the upper middle class", so be it. But to date most of them seem too cowardly to say that.
"We want to tax the highly leveraged family of five who makes a good but not great salary to make it harder to put away for their kids college education, pay their mortgage, car payments and groceries"
My main objective if I was politician currently would be to create as many polices as possible that target the 50th-75th percentile range of Americans.
By target, do you mean cutting their taxes? oof. Who's paying taxes then? Listening to a podcast today on American debt (government primarily) and three points stuck with me:
1. The federal government is basically an insurance company with a standing army
2. Every dollar spent is a tax. Either today or in the future (where it will cost even more than $1)
3. Our biggest social safety nets were envisioned during times when we didn't live as long and we died much more quickly. We've not responded with tax policy that ameliorates that problem. Instead we just balloon deficits.
You would pay for it the same way we pay for Boomers retirement/medicare, military, and the rest of the welfare state, through inflation.
People complain about the K economy, but don't want to fix it. You have two options, cut spending drastically (not happening because Boomers won't vote for it) or targeted tax cuts.
Things we could do:
Raise the SS cap
Single Payor (with AI to diminish administrative bloat). Sorry docs. You're taking a haircut.
Reduce the deficit so that interest payments on government debt aren't exceeding 6% of GDP.
We almost can't cut spending in any meaningful way outside of the military. Our entire society and economic model is based on getting SS at 62-70 and medicare at 65. those are promises made. Can't rug pull now. No way.
Like I said earlier, the only way out may be through a radical change fueled by AI. The cost of labor will be so cheap that taxing it won't do shit anyway.
Say you raise the SS cap from 185 to 250. Who gets hurt? Not as much the people pulling in mid to high six figures. Hardly at all those demanding salaries in the millions. It's the people making between $185-$250K who see a lot of their income go out the door.
ie. the upper middle class. And if that's the Democrats platform, "Tax the upper middle class", so be it. But to date most of them seem too cowardly to say that.
"We want to tax the highly leveraged family of five who makes a good but not great salary to make it harder to put away for their kids college education, pay their mortgage, car payments and groceries"
Run on that.
Options are getting slim to nonexistent. Nobody's voting in a reduction of SS or Medicare benefits.
