Tax Code That Encourages Manufacturing and Savings

[opebo]

High taxes on the rich, no taxes on the working class, Frodo.

Anyway, savings are not something we need to encourage.

[opebo]

Put in place a flat tax. Make the flat tax rate really low - like a 5% income tax. Yeah.

Manufacturing cannot thrive without infrastructure or well trained slaves, Zsach.  Those things alone require a 20% tax rate at the very least.

[opebo]

Interesting statistic prior to the crash. The average young graduate prior to 2008 took about 15 years to reach his parents income level, but it only took him about 5 years to reach his parents standard of living. Guess what made up the difference?

Dubious right-wing definitions of 'standard of living'?

[opebo]

Interesting statistic prior to the crash. The average young graduate prior to 2008 took about 15 years to reach his parents income level, but it only took him about 5 years to reach his parents standard of living. Guess what made up the difference?

Dubious right-wing definitions of 'standard of living'?

Income level is a less dubious statistic than 'standard of living', Wonk, because the latter is terribly prone to funny business like overrating the importance of useless things like the internet, computer machines, or consumer electronics and underrating that a car is far more expensive as a percentage of income than it was in the better days (1970s).

The fact is that income for most people has been in a terrible relative downward spiral since Reagan took office - as is inevitable in any neoliberal economic regime.

[opebo]

Wonk are you referring to cheap junk from WalMart?

[opebo]

...Its all spending combined. So food, clothes, cars, housing, interest/debt service, vacations, insurance, electronics, restaurants, etc. Add up all of the spending for the year and there you go. Damn you're bad!

But what's your point?  You claimed that 'standard of living' was going up even though income is going down.. how can this be other than 'technological advance' or cheaper junk from slave countries?

[opebo]

But what's your point?  You claimed that 'standard of living' was going up even though income is going down.. how can this be other than 'technological advance' or cheaper junk from slave countries?

I asked the question and its clear you weren't able to figure out the answer. The answer is debt.

The reason why graduates achieve a standard of living equal to their parents a whole 10 years prior to their income catching up to their parents is because prior to the crash these folks accomplished that by financing that lifestyle on credit.

No it isn't!  It is because their income is too low.

Before my father started his own business, he was a unionized worker in the late 50s through the late 60s, and the rate of pay was equivalent to about $50-75/hour - this is what enabled the growth in the economy and the improvement in living standards back then.   The reason for the debt is simply the declining and unlivable incomes of the vast majority of americans nowadays (and after all debt is no problem if you have a livable and rising income, as you can simply pay it back).

[opebo]

Your veering off the topic. I don't know what the amount of time was in the 50s for a new adult to achieve his parents income. Prior to the crash it averaged 15 years. It may have been shorter in the 50s.

Yes, I believe it was comon in the 50s and 60s for young men to make more than their fathers immediately upon beginning work.  This was caused by unionization.

Opebo if you truly are worried about the little guy its the perforation of debt to fund luxury spending that should give you cause for concern instead of being on the side of Keynesian bankers that love it when the demand for credit is high and can make obscene profits with a large spread between an extremely low FFR/deposit rates and the interest rate they are lending at.

Not at all wonk, there is no problem with heavy borrowing as long as incomes are legislated to go up rapidly every year, as was the case from the 30s through the 70s.

[opebo]

No luxuries involved, wonk, just house and a car or two.

[opebo]

No luxuries involved, wonk, just house and a car or two.

Well than what are you here disagreeing with me about?

Obviously I am disagreeing with your thesis that people have amassed debt due to spending on luxuries.  To the contrary they have largely amassed debt spending on basic necessities such as houses and cars, and the problem which caused the debt to be un-repayable is their inadequate and falling incomes - falling incomes caused by capitalism (neo-liberal policy).

[opebo]

We need to encourage hiring Americans and penalize companies like Apple that use slave labor in China just so that their product can be 10% cheaper.

Huzzah.  And by 'penalize' I would prefer the term 'nationalize'.  Seize their assets and throw them in a special new prison in the Bahamas - a sort of Guantanamo for the predacious class.

[opebo]

I see a few reasons why China is kicking our asses.

1. They aren't burdened with a terrible patent system
2. The Yuan is quite undervalued.
3. Engineers are more valued in China by society, and some of the politicians are engineers versus here where the politicians tend to be more short-sighted.
4. Lower labor standards, slave labor, lower environmental standards.

Nice.  I would discount only #3, and I consider #4 to be about 90% of the reason.  Just the bottom-line as it were.