| User Info
| Oh Look, Truth! in forum [Market-Ticker]
|
Fraudster
Posts: 4171
Incept: 2011-05-10
|
Quote:But again, when you get down to the bottom line nobody is yet facing down the real issue -- the exponential expansion of medical costs. Until that is addressed nothing else matters because you will never, ever grow the economy at a constant and never-interrupted 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or more percent a year -- and the record from 1980 to today suggests that you need that number to be in excess of 9%. Since 1970, I think the best growth we have recorded was 7% in 1984. That, however, was just a snap-back from a particularly brutal recession and some very loose monetary policy (though debt levels then were still very low). So to answer the (rhetorical) question. No, it won't happen.
----------
"Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." - Napoleon Bonaparte
"Circulation ceases first at the outer edges [Europe and Japan]. It will take a while yet for the decay to reach the heart [America]." - Foundation & Empire by Isaac Asimov
|
Genesis
Posts: 130663
Incept: 2007-06-26
|
I have the data from 1953 forward.
There have been QUARTERS where we have recorded ~10% annualized figures, but sustained rates in excess of 5%? Nope.
And worse, those are fake as the spread between that growth and systemic debt has been approximately 3% the entire time.
----------
I don't care if it makes sense -- only if it makes money. -- Me
Bank (n): See scam, fraud and theft. Eat a bankster -- they're low-carb.
What part of "shall not be infringed" was unclear?
|
Pika-steph
Posts: 54694
Incept: 2007-09-11
Live Free Or Die; US Army Est. 1775
|
Wonder if they'll put up a clip?
----------
Stop the Looting; Start Prosecuting - http://www.FedUpUSA.org/ "The only regulation that really works is failure."--Rick Santelli
|
Fraudster
Posts: 4171
Incept: 2011-05-10
|
 I believe that's right given the take-off in the systemic debt:gdp ratio that started after 1981.
----------
"Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." - Napoleon Bonaparte
"Circulation ceases first at the outer edges [Europe and Japan]. It will take a while yet for the decay to reach the heart [America]." - Foundation & Empire by Isaac Asimov
|
Genesis
Posts: 130663
Incept: 2007-06-26
|
Fraud, yep. Published the debt-adjusted chart many times around here.
----------
I don't care if it makes sense -- only if it makes money. -- Me
Bank (n): See scam, fraud and theft. Eat a bankster -- they're low-carb.
What part of "shall not be infringed" was unclear?
|
Lunatic_fringe
Posts: 9107
Incept: 2007-06-26
Location: Terra Firma
|
Obamacare is designed to increase market share for Big Medical - examples of this include electronic records for hospitals and limiting overhead costs for insurance companies, only large hospitals can afford to implement the EMR system and only the big insurance companies can afford to meet the overhead requirements. The result of this will be the small players will be sold to the large players, creating monopolies and limiting choices for consumers.
Costs will continue to rise until we simply can't afford it anymore (if we're not there already) and I actually welcome that.
|
Heisenberg
Posts: 90
Incept: 2012-09-21
|
What are you sayin TS? I'm not going to collect my soc sec entitlement check when I retire in 2029? Where do I sign up for the riot?
|
Splashdown
Posts: 556
Incept: 2010-04-05
Central Illinois
|
Quote:if you stop the deficit spending (because you refuse to raise the debt ceiling) GDP contracts on a dollar for dollar basis, which is about 6% -- instantly. What about the 'multiplier effect' many people toss around when they speak of government spending and stimulus? People, when arguing for stimulus, have claimed the value is something between a 1.5x to 3x multiplier. If their argument is true, the contraction in GDP associated with an end of deficit spending would be greater than a dollar for dollar basis at a minimum - maybe as much as 1.5 to 3 times. It's a double edged sword. |
Crzymorse
Posts: 1183
Incept: 2010-06-25
Maryland
|
It's a long way down back to 1981 looking at that chart. BTW- Greenspan is a lying sack of **** when he stated that he never knew about the frothy housing market. He knowingly made a Faustian pact in 2001, deflation was considered a fat tailed risk of his asset pumping and he ignored the risk.
A 6% cut to GDP would quickly lead to another 6% decline in GDP. As a matter of fact wages would have to drop by about 2/3 before the economy would stabilize. Essentially Chinese wages would come here with asset deflation as the norm. We might as well spend the money and try to get something worthwhile accomplished.
|
Mo
Posts: 12158
Incept: 2007-06-26
Pa.
|
Quote:Obamacare is designed to increase market share for Big Medical - examples of this include electronic records for hospitals and limiting overhead costs for insurance companies, Around here, the health insurers are buying the hospitals and other medical facilities.
----------
Welcome to Pottersville
|
Lenguado
Posts: 1272
Incept: 2010-01-12
Orlando, FL
|
Quote:Blinder on CNBC just pointed out the obvious -- if you stop the deficit spending (because you refuse to raise the debt ceiling) GDP contracts on a dollar for dollar basis, which is about 6% -- instantly. Did he just call the Precedent a Mudder F~&%ing LIAR on National TV?!?!?!? Quote:"We don't have a spending problem. We have a health-care problem."
- 30 Dec 2012, B. Hussein Obama http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/10/opinion/be....http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424....Wwwhhyyy, YES! I believe that he did!!!! He DID call him a Mudder F~&%ing LIAR!  Logic being that if your credit card is cut off, you can't spend any more. And OBVIOUSLY, you do have a "SPENDING PROBLEM." But we already knew that, didn't we - that Barry Soetoro is a BORN liar...
----------
I just realized... they aren't saying, "Keynesian Economics" they're saying "Kenyansian Economics". Grass Huts for everyone!  Welcome to history’s first Double Dip Depression |
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
Quote:either index the program's retirement age, immediately cut benefits or permanently increase the FICA tax 2.7%. Or increase the Social Security wage base (currently $113,700) to an amount substantially higher. There is no wage limit on Medicare taxes so why is there one on Social Security taxes? |
Genesis
Posts: 130663
Incept: 2007-06-26
|
Quote:There is no wage limit on Medicare taxes so why is there one on Social Security taxes? Because the system is already strongly progressive and benefits cap off as well. You get nothing more for earning more, in short.
----------
I don't care if it makes sense -- only if it makes money. -- Me
Bank (n): See scam, fraud and theft. Eat a bankster -- they're low-carb.
What part of "shall not be infringed" was unclear?
|
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
Well then what's to say the current wage limit ($113,700) is the right wage limit? What's to say it shouldn't be an amount substantially higher, say $200,000 or $250,000 if that would help make the system more sustainable? I understand your point, Karl, I'm just saying maybe it should be raised, more than just by an inflation index each year, to help solve its fiscal problems.
|
Genesis
Posts: 130663
Incept: 2007-06-26
|
So you think they should simply steal more but not pay a higher benefit?
Do you like having a login here? Because advocating theft is a great way to lose that access.
----------
I don't care if it makes sense -- only if it makes money. -- Me
Bank (n): See scam, fraud and theft. Eat a bankster -- they're low-carb.
What part of "shall not be infringed" was unclear?
|
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
I'm not advocating theft, Karl, and I'm sorry that you think that's what it was. I am simply suggesting another alternative to help make the SS system sustainable for a greater length of time, just as you were, with your suggestion to permanently increase the FICA tax 2.7% (which I assume you don't think is stealing more or you wouldn't have suggested it). If my suggestion wasn't clear to you before, I hope it is now.
|
Mrbill
Posts: 7840
Incept: 2008-10-19
North Carolina
|
Increasing the tax on everyone, increasing the retirement age, and cutting benefits across the board all share the pain across all stakeholders more-or-less equally, not just a limited few.
If we're playing pragmatic, then 2 of the 3 would be the most even-handed fix.
Means-testing and wage limit changes are decidedly not even-handed, only some people bear the cost of a much larger number of people not being able to do math.
|
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
Then how is my suggestion of an increase in the wage base any different than what was just done with the income tax (raising the rate on only those individuals making more than $400k and couples making more than $450k)? If this can be done with the income tax, why not the SS tax? The income tax rate change applies to just a limited few. Why would my suggestion of a SS wage base change be any different?
|
Mrbill
Posts: 7840
Incept: 2008-10-19
North Carolina
|
I'm just explaining to you how what Karl said is different from what you said.
Your suggestion is just like what was done with the income tax. And Karl put your suggestion in the "theft" bucket.
He writes many tickers a day about how everyone is going to have to take a bite of the **** sandwich.
Plans that try to force-feed the whole thing to a select few both can't work and will be counter-productive.
|
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
I understand the difference now. However, what Karl thinks of as "theft," not everyone agrees, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that, that being a difference of opinion. And I'm not suggesting that the whole thing be force-fed to a select few. If there's pain to be taken, everyone should share in it. Although some may be able to absorb a little more than others, and be "asked" to.
|
Ben
Posts: 6172
Incept: 2009-10-09
The Distant, Glorious, Past
|
"Because the system is already strongly progressive and benefits cap off as well. You get nothing more for earning more, in short."
They should just cap benefits to what you were taxed. Give you a figure and some actuarial choices and when it reaches zero you get cut off.
Won't happen, but it will fix some of this.
----------
"Why are you going to learn French?"
"Because I'm going to France," says Joe.
"I'm from the future. You should go to China."
|
Peterm99
Posts: 4981
Incept: 2009-03-21
SoCal
|
Calmb4thestorm wrote... . . and be "asked" to. Having the IRS help themselves to the contents of your wallet while ancillary JBTs stick a gun up your nostril if they believe you might express displeasure is not "asking".
----------
". . . the Constitution has died, the economy welters in irreversible decline, we have perpetual war, all power lies in the hands of the executive, the police are supreme, and a surveillance beyond Orwell’s imaginings falls into place." - Fred Reed
|
Mo
Posts: 12158
Incept: 2007-06-26
Pa.
|
It's a tax. It can be raised to any rate on any portion of the population that Obama can strongarm the legislature into. If he can get Boehner to agree to raise the cap, the cap will be raised.
----------
Welcome to Pottersville
|
Calmb4thestorm
Posts: 85
Incept: 2010-06-20
|
Quote:Having the IRS help themselves to the contents of your wallet while ancillary JBTs stick a gun up your nostril if they believe you might express displeasure is not "asking". Why do you think I put the word in quotation marks? |
