A lot of countries are getting it “right” in this modern year of 2013. I live in one of them, Canada, happily. I feel there is adequate opportunity for achieving success no matter what economic bracket you were born into.
[QUOTE=“Bitterseatrader;485556”]
Please explain?[/QUOTE]
What has America become? We started mixing in socialistic polices under FDR. How well has that worked out for us?
All this “socialism” is really just insider deals that benefit the politicians and certain industries under the guise of “helping the people”
Over 47% of Americans are now on the dole. There is no way we will possibly be able to give 30 million Americans free healthcare. There is no way we can possibly pay for all the entitlements and welfare. The Social Security system, and all government programs for that matter, are predicated on 0% interest rates.
Once interest rates go up, this bloated, expansive government will go down, and along with the government, our financial system and economy which the federal government has unconstitutionally meddled in.
The US government has tried directing the market, and it has failed. Look at the tech bubble, housing bubble and the debt bubble that is about to burst. The government fixes interest rates, one of the most important aspects of an economy…
As far as Canada is concerned, in many aspects you guys have more economic liberty than the United States.
Also, the US constitution does not give the federal government the power to enact socialist policies other than the ones already listed. They are illegal. Do we do it anyway? Yes and pretty much all of our problems would not have occurred had we followed the constitution.
I suppose the postal service could be considered socialistic, however that is actually enumerated in the constitution.
The 10th amendment says: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
So if a state wants to have welfare, state healthcare or state schools, that is legal. It is not legal for the federal govt to enact those programs and it is not legal for the federal govt to hold states that refuse to create welfare programs hostage.
This is what a lot of people fail to understand or simply ignore. The United States has one supreme law, the constitution. The constitution grants the government it’s powers, if a power is not listed, the government does not have that power.
They are not given the authority to regulate or ban firearms, they are not given the authority to provide any forms of welfare that aren’t listed.
The only welfare the government can provide is listed in Article 1 section 8 of the constitution. The things listed in article 1 section 8 are how the federal government can “promote the general welfare”. If the government wants a new power, it has to add an amendment to the constitution.
I think slavery was a pretty big deal, and yet they couldn’t just pass a law to ban it. They had to amend the constitution to allow the government to ban it.
The government never had the power to take our income, they had to amend the constitution to collect an income tax. (The amendment was originally only intended to tax people who made over $4,000 2% until the debt from WW1 was paid off, however the politicians never nullified it. $4,000 was a lot of money back then.)
I doubt the amendment would have passed if people knew that one day it would take up to 35% of people’s income.
Pretty much everything the federal government does today is illegal. Individual states are permitted to do thing that would be more socialistic in nature, not the federal government.
-
If a state goes full on socialist, you can move. (Look at all the people leaving places like California which have self destructed themselves)
-
When a state screws up people in other states don’t suffer. Now, since we ignore the constitution, when the Federal government screws up the entire nation suffers.
-
States are better representatives of the people that live there. Some bureaucratic fool in Washington doesn’t know what is best for people living 1,000 miles away in a place that he or she has never even visited, let alone lived in. Local representatives are far more accountable than some far off bureaucrat.
-
The Government should not be 1 size fits all. What is best for John in Georgia, isn’t always good for Sarah in California. Even within states there are major cultural and economic differences. What is best for some guy living in the city, is often a nightmare for some rural farmer. Right now we are basically killing somebody’s dreams and aspirations for some bureaucrat or corporation’s aspirations.
America is a massive country with over 300 million people. We are all unique and each have our own way of life, desires, cultures, religions and passions. One person’s dreams and passion shouldn’t be butcherd because bureaucrat thinks they know what is best. They don’t know what is best for others.
And more often than not, the politicians don’t even care what is best. They are simply passing laws for money.
Most politicians in Washington are nothing more than a PR representative for the largest bidder. They are paid off.
These fools just passed a law that legalized insider trading for themselves. They don’t have our interests in mind, they have their own interests and if the Federal government still followed the constitution, there would be no point for corporations or lobbyists to buy off politicians because there wouldn’t be any benefit to it. What good is it buying off a politician if he can’t pass laws that benefit your corporation by giving you subsidies, bail outs, “stimulus” money or regulations that crush competition?
Excellent post, jolly.
You’ve said it all. And you said it magnificently.
Ok, so your politicians can now legally insider trade? Niceee…Well they gotta invest their legally accepted bribes somewhere, rite?!
Why wouldn’t they do it…If they see you allow whole production factories to be disassembled and shipped overseas …Why wouldn’t they think american people are just a bunch of suckers…Is like 299 million suckers that have strong opinions on the Kardashians a$$
Ignore the title, it’s dumb.
Excellent post jolly. Just simply awesome
[QUOTE=“konan;485617”]Ok, so your politicians can now legally insider trade? Niceee…Well they gotta invest their legally accepted bribes somewhere, rite?!
Why wouldn’t they do it…If they see you allow whole production factories to be disassembled and shipped overseas …Why wouldn’t they think american people are just a bunch of suckers…Is like 299 million suckers that have strong opinions on the Kardashians a$$[/QUOTE]
I think jolly touched on that point. Why should a business employ arrogant, entitlement minded Americans here when they can employ someone in another country for less money? Businesses aren’t in business to employ people they’re in business to make money. Remember? The factory I work at hired 471 people in 2010 by February 2011 only 20 of those people remained. You won’t find a better job (in my area) unless you have a specialized degree. Why should you busy your ass for a good living when the government will hand you a decent one?
Also jolly which bill was that? About insider trading.
This is the direct cause of the downfall of the western countries.
Why should a business employ arrogant, entitlement minded Americans here when they can employ someone in another country for less money?
Because they can’t sell those products to the markets of the slave labor that now makes them…they need the purchasing power of the people whose jobs they outsourced(what’s so hard to understand here?) You think that the Chinese are able to buy iPhones and iPads they make?!.lol This is just a mechanism to make the rich richer and middle class non existent. There is no way that the US will be able to maintain its status of a prosperous country when its citizens are competing with the Chinese citizens in the race to the bottom (bottom wages and bottom work conditions). That’s the NWO buddy, that’s why your local police is training to shoot at the crowds (of zombies lol???) Because the proud people of western democracies wont take the abuse that the Asians are willing to take and they will march the streets to demand their jobs and their sovereign rights back.
[QUOTE=“konan;485732”]
This is the direct cause of the downfall of the western countries. Because they can’t sell those products to the markets of the slave labor that now makes them…they need the purchasing power of the people whose jobs they outsourced(what’s so hard to understand here?) You think that the Chinese are able to buy iPhones and iPads they make?!.lol This is just a mechanism to make the rich richer and middle class non existent. There is no way that the US will be able to maintain its status of a prosperous country when its citizens are competing with the Chinese citizens in the race to the bottom (bottom wages and bottom work conditions). That’s the NWO buddy, that’s why your local police is training to shoot at the crowds (of zombies lol???) Because the proud people of western democracies wont take the abuse that the Asians are willing to take and they will march the streets to demand their jobs and their sovereign rights back.[/QUOTE]
I can’t sometimes if you agree or not lol. You agreed with me about us westerners being arrogant. But not about companies decisions to move jobs where it’s cheaper? Because we are arrogant.
Because that point is irrelevant to the bottom line! “Your local steel mill worker with his 19 bux an hour iis more arrogant than a Chinese guy that works same job 70 to 80 hours a week for 6 bux a DAY?!”. it’st a subjective opinion, innit?! For instance, it depends on who you ask, an A$%=le or someone that actually worked a real job at some point…
My English sucks :38: but you get the point tho
Saying it legalized it might have been a stretch on my part, however it definitely made it easier for them to do it.
And I think it is safe to say that most politicians in Washington do it anyway. There are plenty of examples of Politicians buying land out in the middle of nowhere and then adding an earmark for a new road to go by it, boosting the property value, etc.
Also, there are many examples of companies allowing politicians to buy stock before the IPO when it is much cheaper, in exchange for “favors”. The IPO price starts out higher than the price in which the politicians purchased the stock so it’s basically free money.
This isn’t the free market’s fault though, it’s the lack thereof. It’s because the government has usurped it’s power.
If the government didn’t have so much influence, companies would be forced to duke it out in the marketplace. Out innovating, out producing, making higher quality products for lower prices, providing better services, etc…
There is still some of that now, but we have opened up a new outlet for them to compete. Through the government and politicians.
Now it is often times it is cheaper to just buy out a politician in exchange for a law that crushes your competitor instead of channeling that competitiveness into something productive that creates wealth and makes society better.
I’d be hard pressed to find a law in recent history that didn’t benefit one company or industry at the expense of another. And generally it’s the little guys that get hurt the most. It’s easier for a large company that has the resources for a compliance department to get through the hoops and hurdles of more regulations. Not so much for a small business or entrepreneur.
And it’s really telling that the politicians grant waivers to certain companies, exempt themselves and exempt their staffers from complex monstrosities such as Obamacare.
If you make it less profitable to do business in the United States, businesses will go elsewhere. It is what it is. All these regulations, taxes, mandates don’t just cost taxpayers their money, they cost jobs as well.
And as long as the United States consumer is propped up by cheap credit, the businesses will continue to do it. Will it hurt them in the long run? Perhaps. But that’s because they are acting on government actions.
Building houses from 2001-2008 was a very profitable business, and it was predicated on cheap credit and government incentives.
An economy is made up of many individual members acting independently. This diversity makes a decentralized economy very stable. It only becomes dangerous when business and financial decisions are based on centralized motives, such as a change in laws or federal reserve action that triggers many people to make similar bad decisions at the same time.
We have been encouraging businesses to leave. So they left.
Who do I blame? The businesses for acting on their natural profit motive, or the politicians who made it less profitable to do business here?
There was a time when it was more profitable to manufacture and do business in the United States, because we had the most economic freedom, and when we had that freedom, we created the prosperity that enabled America to become an economic powerhouse. Today, we are simply living off of cheap credit and memories of our previous freedom.
I actually agree that states in the US should be responsible for socialism type policies with the exception of healthcare.
Thats not what lead to the current weakness in the U.S. Economy, it was driven by capitalistic deregulation of financial markets. Don’t you remember the GFC?
No it was it was Over leveraging and credit on the banks part. Then they bailed them out in the US. They should have been allowed to go bankrupt. And so should the auto makers.
And it wasn’t just the US it’s a global problem.
Your words echo “lack of regulation” and it wasn’t just over leverage, it also included packaging BS securities and selling them to investors as AAA rated investments which lead to spiral of collapses all the way to Fannie Mae and Fannie mac. The government had no choice to bail them out, u would find yourself worse off today otherwise. And it was entirely just the USA’s fault which became a global problem.
Well, no, it was govt meddling created our current problems. It was driven by artificially low interest rates and subsidies for housing, along with programs like the community reinvestment act which basically provided the structure for the bubble. The Federal Reserve provided the air that blew it up.
If a highschool chaperon spikes the punch bowl at a prom, and everybody get’s high, who do you blame? The person that made everyone high or the people who unknowingly got high?
Here is a really good video that explains it.
[video=youtube_share;aHJcprsGwPE]http://youtu.be/aHJcprsGwPE[/video]
[QUOTE=“Bitterseatrader;485786”]
Your words echo “lack of regulation” and it wasn’t just over leverage, it also included packaging BS securities and selling them to investors as AAA rated investments which lead to spiral of collapses all the way to Fannie Mae and Fannie mac. The government had no choice to bail them out, u would find yourself worse off today otherwise. And it was entirely just the USA’s fault which became a global problem.[/QUOTE]
No the government had a choice. Those companies would have been better off going through bankruptcy. The taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for it. And of someone is a ****ty boss and makes the wrong decisions for the company. Maybe he doesn’t need to be a boss and maybe that company doesn’t need to exist. They bailed them out. If they hasn’t it would have allowed younger smaller companies to step up make money and spark innovation. Now they just regulated it more.
Iya I actually really enjoy reading your opinions because at one point or another (Bear stearns) I have agreed with you, I don’t truly believe in government stepping in to bail out companies. If the government had let these companies fall, surely new companies would have been formed, some from broken parts of the original mega-corporations and others from take overs and new markets been created. Its true that “too big to fail” allows sluggish and even unprofitable companies to continue for generations, and when they do fall it creates new opportunities. However, its easy to talk about this is hindsight, but at the time without these bailouts the US economy would have fallen much harder and faster. Sure, maybe it would have recovered quicker but who knows. And you can’t help but appreciate that your government was attempting to prevent another great depression using new tools, and measures that no one knew would work and even now how well they did work. Talking in hindsight is all “ifs” and “maybes”, taking action at the time takes balls and determination just like forex.
Also, you need to remember the level of employment these massive companies bring to an economy, allowing them to fall at the time would have driven unemployment levels to new heights and who knows what would have been the outcome.