Why are republicans doing this?

Quote from Maverick74:

Ricter you need to learn the difference between a tax cut and a subsidy.
I need to learn it, or the lawmakers who give either or both to the job creators need to learn it?
 
Quote from Ricter:

I need to learn it, or the lawmakers who give either or both to the job creators need to learn it?

No, you already forgot. Maybe you need to make flashcards to help you remember. Tax cuts go to everyone, subsidies go to cronies. I can look for an online study guide if it will help you learn it faster.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Let them fix our potholes

So the government is responsible for facilitating effective transportation?

Seems like you're contradicting yourself given the context of this thread. Please explain.
 
Quote from trendlover:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I understand. In the big picture the goal is less air pollution from the cars. To have more electric cars. To change.
The big picture here is do what the govt tells you to do even if that means people borderline poverty have to subsidize silly luxury cars for rich white folks.
 
Quote from Mike805:

So the government is responsible for facilitating effective transportation?

Seems like you're contradicting yourself given the context of this thread. Please explain.

"Local" government should fix our potholes, streetlights, keep the streets safe, etc.

At the federal level the government uses the commerce clause to regulate inter-state transportation that is the commerce that is transacted between states. This includes the regulation of the vehicles used for commerce, the products themselves and the actual people engaging in that commerce.

This does not mean the government should be subsidizing political cronies in return for favors or campaign contributions. Mike, you have no out here. Our constitution is very clear about what the government can and cannot do at each level of government.

And btw, I forgot to respond to one of your inaccurate points a while back regarding Europe and innovation. Europe spends a fortune on private companies trying to "help" them innovate and yet our free markets are 100 times more innovative then theirs. Almost every western European nation subsidizes and provides funding to help their companies compete with ours and they lose almost 100 times out of a 100. Our model works, theirs does not.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Tax cuts can go to, and only to, cronies as well. The entities you're considering as completely different actually overlap in a practical sense.
 
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogs...lysis+(Mish's+Global+Economic+Trend+Analysis)

Maybe Mike should move to France. It looks like they are going to throw the kitchen sink at innovation. Good luck with that.

Link is not working, here is the content:


Hollande Asks ECB to Engage in Japanese Style Currency Debasement

French president Francois has had enough of austerity but claims he "cannot do it alone". The Financial Times reports François Hollande goes on ‘offensive’ over stalled EU economy.

François Hollande promised an “offensive” to bring “more growth and less austerity” to Europe as he launched a bid to resurrect his presidency.

Mr Hollande said the first priority of his second-year “offensive” was a four-point plan to “get Europe out of its torpor” – concentrating on combating youth unemployment and a strategy of investment. “The number one objective is changing Europe’s direction to have more growth and less austerity,” he said.

“I cannot do it alone,” he said, adding that the European Central Bank could “put in liquidity, as is happening in Japan, which has allowed a fall in the yen and helped exports”.

The president promised a 10-year investment programme in digital, energy, health and infrastructure sectors to regenerate growth, saying that it could in part be financed by the sale of some of France’s big state corporate holdings, which have a total market capitalisation of about €60bn. But he made clear that any sales would not be at the expense of ceding state control or influence over vital companies.

Economic Illiteracy

Not only is the Hollande in praise of competitive currency debasement which mathematically cannot work if every country does it (not that it can work anyway without long-term consequences), he also wants to sell France government holdings "without ceding state control or influence over vital companies".

Good luck with that. No one in their right mind would want to buy companies under such conditions.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Mr Hollande said the first priority of his second-year “offensive” was a four-point plan to “get Europe out of its torpor”

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Exactly how does he intend to end the topor: he's already chased his highest net taxpayers out of the country.

What's he gonna do close the borders and squeeze the shit out of everybody that's left.

I FOR ONE SURE AS HELL HOPE SO, BECAUSE I LOVE SOCIALISM...















FOR OTHERS.
maniacal laugh :D :cool:
 
Quote from Maverick74:

OK, a couple of things here. That 3k deduction is for retail traders, not professional traders. Second, professional traders can actually write off all their losses if they are setup properly. THAT I don't have an issue with and I will tell you why. For traders who risk THEIR capital and pay taxes on their capital, if they lose all their money, they get ZERO benefits from the government. ZERO. They CANNOT collect unemployment, and in many cases, they can actually owe money to the government with a zero net worth. I have always believed that ANYONE who risks THEIR own money, not other's people's money as in a hedge fund, but their own money, they should not pay ANY taxes. If they ARE going to pay taxes, then they should be able to recover their losses from future earnings.

I have mixed feelings on letting corporations getting away with this mostly because they are not risking THEIR money. They have stock holders, bond holders, and loans from the bank. I don't think corporations should be able to use debt and losses to manipulate the system for personal benefit which many corporations do., But you asked about traders. And for professional traders, giving them a "clawback" does not constitute a subsidy. The reason for this is that the taxes they pay in are coming from risks they are taking. In other words, they own the downside along with the upside. They should be able to offset losses with gains and vice versa. The bigger macro problem are the too big to fail banks who get to own all the upside and lay of the downside on taxpayers.

With regards to Tesla or Solyndra, they are getting taxpayer money in which THEY reap all the upside and the taxpayer gets nothing. That is unless they go bankrupt, in which the tax payer pays the entire bill. Now, let's try this. Say if Tesla was going to be owned by the gov't entirely. And the profits from Tesla go straight back to the taxpayer instead of to Elon Musk, then you have a different argument. You have now balanced both sides of the ledger. The taxpayer gets the upside and the downside. Then the argument shifts to fairness and cronyism. For example, are we nationalizing Tesla because Elon Musk was a large donor to the Obama Campaign? Are we going to siphon tax dollars from middle class Americans and line the pockets of people inside the company and then claim the company is not profitable therefore no income is going back to the tax payer? See how complicated this can get.

This is why the easiest solution is to make the game fair and let the best man win. Simplicity adds value. We keep the gov't honest, we keep the system honest and we provide an incentive for others to try and take risks knowing they have a fair shot instead of not taking a risk because they know the crony who donates to the white house is going to get the contract.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I want to ask you this. For pretend you know 100% TSLA price is going up 50% in the future. Guarantee. But you do not agree with TSLA having money from the government. Will you take the bet and be long TSLA to profit?
 
Back
Top