Essential Economics for Politicians
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
-
- Tags
- finance too
Bruddah IZ
DA
Their too smart to do either.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Drooling usually means I got a good night sleep. I did ride a short bus to school. A 1971 VW. Tan colored though. We didn't wear helmets back then. Not even to ride a bike.
Bruddah IZ
DA
And I'm too smart to use "their" instead of They're
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Trump's Budget Paves the Road to Fiscal Failure
If we're not careful, it may be impossible to exit the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom.
https://fee.org/articles/trumps-budget-paves-the-road-to-fiscal-failure/
Challenging the Entitlement Premises
The fact is America is continuing to move in the long-run direction of fiscal unsustainability. The supposed untouchability of the “entitlement” segment of the federal budget will have to be made touchable. Nearly 90 years ago, in 1930, the famous “Austrian” economist, Ludwig von Mises, said to an audience of Viennese industrialists during an earlier economic crisis:
Whenever there is talk about decreasing public expenditures, the advocates of this fiscal spending policy voice their objection, saying that most of the existing expenditures, as well as the increasing expenditures, are inevitable . . . What exactly does ‘inevitable’ mean in this context?
That the expenditures are based on various laws that have been passed in the past is not an objection if the argument for eliminating these laws is based on their damaging effects on the economy. The metaphorical use of the term ‘inevitable’ is nothing but a haven in which to hide in the face of an inability to comprehend the seriousness of our situation. People do not want to accept that fact that the public budget has to be radically reduced.”
If we're not careful, it may be impossible to exit the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom.
https://fee.org/articles/trumps-budget-paves-the-road-to-fiscal-failure/
Challenging the Entitlement Premises
The fact is America is continuing to move in the long-run direction of fiscal unsustainability. The supposed untouchability of the “entitlement” segment of the federal budget will have to be made touchable. Nearly 90 years ago, in 1930, the famous “Austrian” economist, Ludwig von Mises, said to an audience of Viennese industrialists during an earlier economic crisis:
Whenever there is talk about decreasing public expenditures, the advocates of this fiscal spending policy voice their objection, saying that most of the existing expenditures, as well as the increasing expenditures, are inevitable . . . What exactly does ‘inevitable’ mean in this context?
That the expenditures are based on various laws that have been passed in the past is not an objection if the argument for eliminating these laws is based on their damaging effects on the economy. The metaphorical use of the term ‘inevitable’ is nothing but a haven in which to hide in the face of an inability to comprehend the seriousness of our situation. People do not want to accept that fact that the public budget has to be radically reduced.”
Bruddah IZ
DA
In addition, the entitlement mindset must be confronted with an articulate and reasoned defense of individual liberty, based on a philosophy of individual rights to life, liberty, and honestly acquired property. Plus, the ethics of liberty must be shown to be inseparable from the idea of peaceful and voluntary association among people in all facets of life, and that government’s role is to secure and protect such liberty and individual rights, not to abridge and violate them.
If this is not done, and done successfully, the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom may be impossible from which to exit.
If this is not done, and done successfully, the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom may be impossible from which to exit.
I suppose when one works a non-essential military job and contributes nothing to society they are inclined to support spending cuts anywhere but the military.
The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending
The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.
The military burden
The cost of security-related spending dwarfs the net cost of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid combined. The CBO's most recent (post-sequester) estimate of 2013 discretionary security spending was $751 billion. That primarily accounts for military spending but includes spending for related departments such as Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs. That total excludes mandatory spending related to benefits for veterans and members of the military, which is projected at $132 billion. Thus, total military and security spending will approach $900 billion, even after the recent budget cuts.
Obviously, some level of military spending is vital for our national security. However, by comparison to any reasonable standard, the U.S. spends far too much. China, which fields the second-most powerful military, plans to spend just $119 billion on the military this year, along with $124 billion on internal security. While these figures may be understated to some extent, Chinese military spending is undoubtedly a fraction of U.S. military spending.
https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...ruth-about-the-federal-deficit-its-not-j.aspx
The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending
The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.
The military burden
The cost of security-related spending dwarfs the net cost of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid combined. The CBO's most recent (post-sequester) estimate of 2013 discretionary security spending was $751 billion. That primarily accounts for military spending but includes spending for related departments such as Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs. That total excludes mandatory spending related to benefits for veterans and members of the military, which is projected at $132 billion. Thus, total military and security spending will approach $900 billion, even after the recent budget cuts.
Obviously, some level of military spending is vital for our national security. However, by comparison to any reasonable standard, the U.S. spends far too much. China, which fields the second-most powerful military, plans to spend just $119 billion on the military this year, along with $124 billion on internal security. While these figures may be understated to some extent, Chinese military spending is undoubtedly a fraction of U.S. military spending.
https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...ruth-about-the-federal-deficit-its-not-j.aspx
Bruddah IZ
DA
Not surprised you chose the fool. But it's a nice little trick that the fools pulled on you fools by adding civilian and military pensions and, VA benefits to defense spending of $646 billion to arrive at $900 billion, which is still less than SSA at $960 billion and Medicare at $1.17 trillion. I've posted the debt clock repeatedly so that you fools aren't misled by fools. #read
http://www.usdebtclock.org
Bruddah IZ
DA
#wezwillbealongshortlytohelpyoudig
Sheriff Joe
DA
Lying mother fuckers, moonbeam needs to go.
Cost for California bullet train rises to $77.3 billion...
The disclosure about the higher costs comes nearly a decade after voters approved a $9-billion bond to build a bullet train system. The original idea was that the federal government would pay about a third of what was then an estimated $33-billion project, with private investors covering another third.
But those assumptions proved faulty on numerous counts. In later business plans the projected price went to $43 billion, somewhere between $98 billion and $117 billion, down to $66 billion, and then $64 billion in 2016. And the funding sources dried up. The federal government only put in $3.5 billion and Republicans have vowed not to add another penny. Private investors have said they would not commit any investment to the project without a guarantee that they can't lose money.
Potentially the biggest single future challenge will involve the mountain passages in Southern California and Northern California. The San Gabriel and Tehachapi mountain crossings will require as much as 36 miles of deep tunneling, the most ambitious underground transportation construction in the nation's history. In the north, the project will have to build a 13-mile tunnel under the Pacheco Pass, just east of Gilroy. There will be other costly tunnels in urban Los Angeles and San Francisco, as well.
Cost for California bullet train rises to $77.3 billion...
The disclosure about the higher costs comes nearly a decade after voters approved a $9-billion bond to build a bullet train system. The original idea was that the federal government would pay about a third of what was then an estimated $33-billion project, with private investors covering another third.
But those assumptions proved faulty on numerous counts. In later business plans the projected price went to $43 billion, somewhere between $98 billion and $117 billion, down to $66 billion, and then $64 billion in 2016. And the funding sources dried up. The federal government only put in $3.5 billion and Republicans have vowed not to add another penny. Private investors have said they would not commit any investment to the project without a guarantee that they can't lose money.
Potentially the biggest single future challenge will involve the mountain passages in Southern California and Northern California. The San Gabriel and Tehachapi mountain crossings will require as much as 36 miles of deep tunneling, the most ambitious underground transportation construction in the nation's history. In the north, the project will have to build a 13-mile tunnel under the Pacheco Pass, just east of Gilroy. There will be other costly tunnels in urban Los Angeles and San Francisco, as well.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Entitlements: The "Most Predictable Economic Crisis in History"
It’s not just libertarians and conservatives who recognize that there is a problem.
https://fee.org/articles/entitlements-the-most-predictable-economic-crisis-in-history/
Entitlements....this is why the left wing socialist are having mini strokes about tax reform
Entitlements: The "Most Predictable Economic Crisis in History"
It’s not just libertarians and conservatives who recognize that there is a problem.
https://fee.org/articles/entitlements-the-most-predictable-economic-crisis-in-history/
Who's gonna pay for entitlements now that the tax bill will allow the people who earned the money to spend the money how they please....
Almost as if they were entitled to that money.
Outrageous !!
Bruddah IZ
DA
Ahhhh yes, deficits