Post Reply  Post Thread 

My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Author Message
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #1
My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Debt is only a bad when it causes a loss in consumer confidence, and thereby spending and increased savings. One man's debt is another man's asset and vis versa. If anything, the debt has made us stronger, not weaker by any means; albeit, the current amount of interest it charges us is troubling but that should boil down once our debt to GDP hits 150% and our entire economy collapses. Anyway, decreasing spending, or decreasing the value of our currency while deflating the amount of assets, should be the best next option. As it currently stands, the country is rife with corruption, and this corruption mainly resides within federal agencies. These federal agencies have their power due to both regulation and funding. A good example of one of these programs is the college education system, where, in spite of gross increases in funding, has gradually become more expensive due to corruption with top administrators in those colleges. Most new funding to those colleges go towards administrators' salaries. In other words, the best case scenario for our country is the shrinking of federal government influence through assets(GDP), not the strengthening of it through likely even more corrupt public enterprises. A major problem with decreasing public spending is unemployment and deflation. The deflation can be counteracted through decreasing taxation, a form of deflation, and renting away, or auctioneering, previous government enterprise with new private enterprises. We should then halt most of the subsidies going to large corporations and counteract the increased foreign competition with increased tariffs. Then increase minimum wage to 13.50 dollars in hour and subsidize qualified small businesses(program name doesn't really matter) to halt mass unemployment. If we do not halt mass unemployment, about 10 million jobs will be lost(this is a personal estimate.) then enact legislation that will increase minimum wage by two cents each year. From there, the boring part, look over all the resources and assets the US has(GNP) and figure how to reorganize the tax code to entice a net gain in GDP. Finally, overall decrease regulation for private enterprises to increase competition, as decreased regulation benefits small companies the most.[/align]

28.01.2016 17:44
Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,963
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #2
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

The interest on the national debt is mainly a free lunch (a subsidy) for the 1%. Government gilts, however, are the safest bet for pension funds. It is what keeps pensions safe from inflation.
You can have the Gov issue interest bearing securities or you can have it run a permanent zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and have it stop issuing gilts. Or you can have the former, but forbid foreign entities from buying Gov gilts. Or you can have the Gov operating a basic pension for all; which could be annually indexed with inflation.
There is no arbitrary Gov debt to GDP ratio or Gov deficit to GDP ratio that will "collapse" the economy. So long as the domestic private sector wants to deleverage, you'll always have a spending shortfall that - if not covered by spending from some other sector (Gov or Foreign sector) - leads to output not getting sold and thus to involuntary & permanent unemployment.
If you want the US to practice active protectionism, it needs to pull out first of its free trade agreements and institutions, like the WTO.
Sure, if you want Gov to manage less of the economy, there's always the option of privatization + reducing taxes.
I don't think a 13.5$ minimum wage is a living wage. I would raise it to at least 15$.
As for wanting US exports to be more competitive. Why would you want such a thing? Especially when Aggregate Demand from abroad is decreasing due to the effects of private debt deflation & fiscal austerity worldwide. Why would you want to compete for a shrinking market with countries who actively underpay & exploit their workers?
As for decreasing regulations benefiting small firms the most; I don't think that's true at all. The so-called Finance Modernization Act that Clinton passed did not benefit small banks - it simply benefited the big investment houses. The debate shouldn't be "more vs less regulation", but "smart vs stupid regulation". You want to have certain standards and to defend those standards via simple rules. In order to do that, you need to crack down on loopholes. Easiest way to do this would be to eliminate exemptions & deductions.
So long as you achieve & maintain full employment & price stability & push to convert more of the economy to being eco-friendly, then GDP going up or down or staying neutral doesn't matter.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
29.01.2016 09:53
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #3
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Helsworth Wrote:
The interest on the national debt is mainly a free lunch (a subsidy) for the 1%. Government gilts, however, are the safest bet for pension funds. It is what keeps pensions safe from inflation.
You can have the Gov issue interest bearing securities or you can have it run a permanent zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and have it stop issuing gilts. Or you can have the former, but forbid foreign entities from buying Gov gilts. Or you can have the Gov operating a basic pension for all; which could be annually indexed with inflation.
There is no arbitrary Gov debt to GDP ratio or Gov deficit to GDP ratio that will "collapse" the economy. So long as the domestic private sector wants to deleverage, you'll always have a spending shortfall that - if not covered by spending from some other sector (Gov or Foreign sector) - leads to output not getting sold and thus to involuntary & permanent unemployment.
If you want the US to practice active protectionism, it needs to pull out first of its free trade agreements and institutions, like the WTO.
Sure, if you want Gov to manage less of the economy, there's always the option of privatization + reducing taxes.
I don't think a 13.5$ minimum wage is a living wage. I would raise it to at least 15$.
As for wanting US exports to be more competitive. Why would you want such a thing? Especially when Aggregate Demand from abroad is decreasing due to the effects of private debt deflation & fiscal austerity worldwide. Why would you want to compete for a shrinking market with countries who actively underpay & exploit their workers?
As for decreasing regulations benefiting small firms the most; I don't think that's true at all. The so-called Finance Modernization Act that Clinton passed did not benefit small banks - it simply benefited the big investment houses. The debate shouldn't be "more vs less regulation", but "smart vs stupid regulation". You want to have certain standards and to defend those standards via simple rules. In order to do that, you need to crack down on loopholes. Easiest way to do this would be to eliminate exemptions & deductions.
So long as you achieve & maintain full employment & price stability & push to convert more of the economy to being eco-friendly, then GDP going up or down or staying neutral doesn't matter.

I fundamentally disagree with you. Government gilts are not safe from inflation and can decrease in value if there is a sharp increase of credit or assets(inflation.) This inflation is called hyper inflation, as has been prevalent throughout US history and is a major reason why the constitution made it illegal for states to print money. Albeit, to some extent, securities do help with capital and such, it does have a downside as it can be unstable(recently it has been stable.)
There comes a point and time when government debt to GDP becomes too high. It causes hyper inflation on a massive scale, as the liquidity and financial liability is now in question with the government, the question being can they pay off their debts? The reason it leads to hyper inflation is indirect. The government issues cheap credit to try and lower the value of its securities so that it can pay off debts. This leads large deflation at the investment level and large inflation at the consumer level, which inevitably leads to a collapsing economy.
I hope they do pull out of those trade agreements. Those trade agreements have been an overal detriment to the economy, as they have allowed cheap foreign goods to easily out-compete American made goods. This has forced American companies to move to those countries - so that they may compete as well. This has, of course, led to a floundering economy, with almost no liquidity or drive for growth and employment, which, inevitably, has a led to stagnating wages for lower quintiles of income. All of these effects culminate together to harm the economy in an astounding fashion.
$15 dollar minimum wage, in my opinion, is taking it too far. Most United States citizens are NOT on the federal minimum wage. This increase in minimum wage is merely meant to increase spending and investment, not necessarily create a lower class independent of the federal government, as the increased minimum wage will cause inflation and we will be back to where we started after a year. The increased minimum wage is also a form of regulation, which hurts small businesses much more when compared to conglomerates or corporations. This is because, quite simply, the small business has less money to spare when compared to those conglomerates by a significant margin. The increased expenditures will hurt competition, which will hurt spenders, which will hurt the economy as a whole, which is why I also propose subsidies to those small businesses to try and counteract the regulation.
I want the US to be more competitive due to the shrinking labor force. Currently, 90 million people are out of the labor force, and I can guarantee you that a large portion of those people are neither children or elderly in retirement. The increased competition internationally, and the thereby making operation cost cheaper here, will hopefully incentivize large export orented corporations to move here and provide well paying labor as well as Lowe quality goods that can be used to compete world-wide. Also, you need to note that the American market is shrinking too, thus expanding market influence internationally will be the next best bet for restoring liquidity.
The 'regulation hurts small business' is entirely based upon the concept of small businesses have less money when compared to conglomerates, and thus small businesses have less to money to deal with operation costs of fulfilling regulation. Some regulation can cause externalities and in the end help small business, but I assure you these are not the uniform regulation consequences. It is also based upon a 'small businesses produce less services and goods,' increased regulation can lead to a inflation of the prices of those goods, which directly reduces their competitiveness with conglomerates, as they will be unable to effectively sell their goods as they could otherwise, without the regulation.
Loopholes are impossible to crack down on as they are created in and for the interests of businessmen in Washington.
Actually, it does matter, because you cannot have employment without economic growth, it just doesn't happen. GDP growth is needed to compete internationally, and to incentivize international investors to invest in our businesses and securities, effectively increasing the wealth of the country. This increased wealth will likely be put to use for expanding business here if my regulations are put in place, which will be what inevitably leads to employment and wage growth.

29.01.2016 14:20
Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,963
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #4
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Private gilts or commodities are not safer than the interest bearing bonds of a government that spends & taxes in its own sovereign currency. If gilts weren't safe, the rich would not be complaining about QE.
You're ignoring output. Output is not inelastic. The history of all hyperinflation shows that the overproduction of money is a CONSEQUENCE, not the CAUSE of a crisis of hyperinflation. The list of causes are: loss of a war, collapse of production, natural disasters, political instability, brazen corruption, the end of a peg to a hard currency.
Government debt is nongovernment sector savings. All government debt in the world represents worldwide private sector savings. No amount of arbitrary ratings from rating companies can affect a government with monetary sovereignty's ability to remain operational. The Gov's net fiscal position is reactive to the nongovernment sector's spending behavior. The automatic fiscal stabilizers always work counter-cyclically. So in a boom period, the Gov's deficit shrinks rapidly and can even turn into a surplus (see the Clinton surpluses). In the end, the domestic private sector's credit structure depends on the amount of HPM it has (aka Gov debt), on the net flow of financial income (Gov sector + Foreign sector), and on animal spirits - the desire of people to spend more than their income (aka leverage).
Brazil changed currencies numerous times; had all kinds of screwed up pegs. They even had 1000% inflation rate in 1988 if I'm not mistaken the year. Their economy did not collapse.
Making the minimum wage into a living wage is NOT inflationary. It will NOT kill off small business, if the MW increase is correlated with a reduction in fiscal drag/fiscal stimulus. Unless firms pay a living wage, you're not going to address poverty. You can try it via a different path - have the Gov implement a basic income, then you can abolish the MW.
The USA's GDP output gap is considerable.
http://www.austeritysucks.com/the-united...clock.html
Accumulated GDP output gaps between 2008 and up to the present are around 7,3 trillion dollars in lost time, lost output, lost consumption.
Many of your arguments are born out of the same zombie economic theology that robbed your country of full employment, that led to the creation of those conglomerates you hate, and to the poverty entertained today.
Economic growth in and of itself tells you nothing about the economy. Inflation in and of itself tells you nothing about the economy. You need to take into account all the factors. You can have uber economic growth in a slaver society. Who cares? GDP growth not seen in wage growth in seen in profit growth.
Rich people don't create jobs. You had technological innovation + full employment + price stability when the top income bracket was taxed at 90%.

Investors invest only if there'd AD to cover. The countries with largest public sector investments usually receive the higher figures in foreign investment, anyway. Why? Because Gov spending is income for the non-gov sector. It means people get access to infrastructure & public utilities. It means they are able to spend for themselves. What you're arguing for is Supply-Side economics (Reaganomics), aka "horseshit and sparrow theory" as it was so eloquently described by Galbraith. Wealth doesn't trickle down, it trickles up. By cutting taxes for the rich, and leaving the poor and the middle class as they are - all you're going to do is increase the profits of companies. Nobody will hire more people or invest to produce more, when the number of orders for their goods/services remains the same. Output is shaped by demand. Depressed demand = Depressed output. Why gamble with trying to import AD from abroad, when you can create AD domestically by adjusting macro fiscal policy (cutting taxes on labor & consumption and or increasing spending for public purpose)? You want the private sector to bounce back? Get rid of FICA.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 29.01.2016 14:58 by Helsworth.

29.01.2016 14:51
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Richard Wilson
Junior Member
*


Posts: 44
Words count: 2,528
Group: Basic
Joined: May2015
Status: Offline
Reputation: 0
Experience: 708
Glory Points: 100
Medals: 1

Post: #5
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Here's mine: =

1. Eliminate FICA (Regressive Payroll Taxation) in order to stimulate aggregate demand and stimulate new job creation. (FICA creates a real dis-incentive for hiring new and additional associates as it taxes labor and hiring.) Find a better alternative, such as raising additional revenue via the income tax. Such could be done with elimination of income tax deductions (Mortgage, State & Local Taxes, Etc.) which tend to serve the super-rich, the "speculating class," and large multi national corporations.

2. Reform the corporate income tax code in order to induce business sector expenditure. Such could be accomplished. (Eliminate (MOST) corporate income tax deductions and instead allow the immediate depreciation of new capital acquisition. Such would, in turn, provide a real and tangible financial incentive for businesses to expand and / or acquire new capital goods as a means of reducing their income tax liabilities.) Then, introduce a Neutral Territorial Tax Regime in order to ensure U.S. multi-nationals have little to no incentive to shelter their earnings abroad (in Ireland, the Caribbean, the Netherlands, and Canada). Indeed, a Neutral Territorial Tax, combined with immediate depreciation, would create an incentive for businesses to repatriate their off-shore profits and spend those profits in America because doing so would allow them to avoid taxation (while promoting growth and new job creation).

3. Establish a National Infrastructure Bank. Infrastructure is critical to sustainable long-term economic health, growth, and social well-being and has been neglected for quite some time. Indeed, our nation's infrastructure is in critical condition. A well-funded NIB could be established with little fiscal strain. - Here's how: Establish an NIB in a manner similar to a quasi-governmental Investment Bank - thus permitting financial leverage. Allow the NIB to issue tax exempted bonds, which could then be sold to the Federal Reserve (I.e. Helicopter Money rather than pro-financial elite QE), to U.S. corporations (allowing tax exemption on repatriated profits invested in the NIB), and to U.S. households and pension funds.

4. Introduce a Comprehensive Social Capital Plan. - Could include investing more in labor training programs, higher education, R&D, and other areas critical to international competitiveness, innovation, new business creation, etc. Such could be done in a cost-effective manner with minimal fiscal strain. (Tuition rates are rising faster than inflation and should be contained. There's too much administrative waste and little to no reason books should be as expensive as is the case. Like health care, we spend more on higher education than other Western Nations with no additional return.) Trade assistance programs, labor training programs, and vocational education all provide another viable area for improving our global competitive position. R&D (Science) is another area we have, as a nation, collectively neglected (both in the public and private sectors). Additional R&D expenditure could be made with minimal fiscal strain if we charged companies (royalty) for patenting and marketing the results of public financed research.

5. Promote / require fairness in international trade and do whatever we can to promote stabilization and growth abroad. - We could, for ex., leverage our position to require China to further liberalize and open their sectors to our businesses, to establish a minimal level of labor protection, and to establish a minimal level of environmental protection - Revoking Normal Trade Relations and implementing anti-dumping tariffs / quotas as permitted under the WTO? Furthermore, we need to be promoting global stabilization and growth in a fair and sustainable fashion. Greater participation in Developmental Banking and / or / plus an International Marshall Plan (would provide new & immediate demand for our manufacturers + build critical and growth sustaining infrastructure in the developing world). The Marshall Plan, which reconstructed Western Europe, amounted to $130 billion in today's $'s. Such, and even more, could be financed - on an ongoing basis, with minimal fiscal strain - redirecting existing international aid, ending and redirecting corporate and agribusiness welfare, and using our position and voice within Developmental Banks, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. ISIS can be attributed to this: We invaded Iraq and did little to rebuild their nation and the infrastructure we bombed / dismantled. Well funded terrorists (ISIS) offered a source of guaranteed income. FDR: We have come to a clear realization of the fact, however, that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry, people who are out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. So, in addition to economic benefits, there are security benefits to investing in international reconstruction / construction / growth and stabilization.

6. Deregulation. Yes, I said deregulation. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default...mbargo.pdf Occupational licensing standards often do little to improve quality, while hindering growth, raising costs, and hindering new job creation. The same can be said for other regulations - such as those now being imposed on coal mining. We need to establish a National Commission, comprised of scholars and policy-makers, using cost-and-benefit analysis, to locate and remove regulations which undermine growth and competitiveness.

7. Real health care reform. No, I don't believe socialized medicine is the solution for our nation. I also don't think "Obama Care," written by and for the health insurance business, is the solution. However, we do need to contain costs and manage plus reduce demand and, in some instances, there is a role for state funded institutions (such as Public / Community Health Departments). Here's the solution:

Eliminate Income Tax Exemption (On Employer Provided Health Insurance Coverage): Resulting in an immediate $200 billion + in additional income tax revenue which, over time, would decline as it'd encourage businesses and consumers to provide / purchase lower priced plans. (Coverage levels are often too generous, unjustified, offered to avoid taxation, and encourage / facilitate overuse, over-billing, and waste.) https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center...FY2016.pdf

Nationalize the Health Insurance Exchange: requiring businesses and consumers to purchase from the exchange. Allow businesses & consumers to purchase into Medicare & Medicaid (Public Option) and allow our health insurers to compete across state lines. (Substitute state level standards and regulations with national standards and regulations.)

Expand and extend Medicaid Coverage in order to eliminate the need for ACA Premium Subsidization. (Between Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance, Medicaid is the cost-effective option): http://www.businessinsider.com/graph-med...ce-2013-12 Doing so would: provide better coverage and reduce / control expenditure. Additional reforms could be introduced to further control expenditure.

Introduce a National Health Info Sys and / or require Medical ID Card. Thousands of lives and a substantial sum could be saved if health care providers had access to immediate, comprehensive, and accurate information before treating an individual. (Such a program could also reduce prescription drug abuse.)

Investing in and mandating comprehensive preventative care: - such as imposing a tax on sugar / HFCS and / or high calorie food and using the revenue to establish free communal fitness centers and / or additional / improved recreational centers and programs, increased alcohol taxation / marijuana legalization and taxation, etc. to fund substance abuse and mental health programs, and other things / programs / initiatives of this nature.

8. Entitlement Reform - Yes, it's needed. Today's retirees and even, to a lesser degree, tomorrow's retirees, will receive more than was paid into Social Security & Medicare. People have less children and are living longer. It's basic math: Less people contributing relative to those who are receiving = NOT SUSTAINABLE. We need to reform those programs in a manner which would spare those who depend on them more from the pain / benefit reduction. (Introducing a new minimum guaranteed income for seniors, slowing benefit growth for those who receive more - as per the Simpson Bowles Commission, indexing to Chained-CPI, and cracking down on fraud, introducing Medicare cost-sharing and raising premiums for those who can and are able to contribute more.) Such comprehensive reform would: translate into long-term savings which could be used toward either deficit-reduction or investing in improving our infrastructure and / or improving social capital, restore confidence in our fiscal health (leading to a lower borrowing and servicing rate on our financial obligations / treasuries), and ensure the financial viability of those programs moving forward.

9. Redistribute income and wealth using market-oriented, tried and true methods: Yes, I know, redistribution strikes a horrible chord in this nation. However, our income and wealth distribution is no longer sustainable and redistribution can be conducted in a manner which generates additional income and wealth growth - even for those who are wealthier. - A Negative Income Tax would: encourage more men, women, youth, and seniors to join / remain in the workforce and would provide those with less income (who also tend to spend vs. save) with more disposable income. - A higher minimum wage ($10 an hour, indexed to inflation?) would raise the productive level of labor and improve the retention rate which, in turn, would reduce training costs and foster specialization and better customer service - the Costco Way on a national level - promoting share ownership with tax incentives for both employers and associates - such as an expanded and mandated national 401K / IRA Program, which would also lead to more wealth creation.

This post was last modified: 25.02.2016 21:28 by Richard Wilson.

25.02.2016 09:59
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #6
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Richard Wilson Wrote:
Here's mine: =

1. Eliminate FICA (Regressive Payroll Taxation) in order to stimulate aggregate demand and stimulate new job creation. (FICA creates a real dis-incentive for hiring new and additional associates as it taxes labor and hiring.) Find a better alternative, such as raising additional revenue via the income tax. Such could be done with elimination of income tax deductions (Mortgage, State & Local Taxes, Etc.) which tend to serve the super-rich, the "speculating class," and large multi national corporations.

2. Reform the corporate income tax code in order to induce business sector expenditure. Such could be accomplished. (Eliminate (MOST) corporate income tax deductions and instead allow the immediate depreciation of new capital acquisition. Such would, in turn, provide a real and tangible financial incentive for businesses to expand and / or acquire new capital goods as a means of reducing their income tax liabilities.) Then, introduce a Neutral Territorial Tax Regime in order to ensure U.S. multi-nationals have little to no incentive to shelter their earnings abroad (in Ireland, the Caribbean, the Netherlands, and Canada). Indeed, a Neutral Territorial Tax, combined with immediate depreciation, would create an incentive for businesses to repatriate their off-shore profits and spend those profits in America because doing so would allow them to avoid taxation (while promoting growth and new job creation).

3. Establish a National Infrastructure Bank. Infrastructure is critical to sustainable long-term economic health, growth, and social well-being and has been neglected for quite some time. Indeed, our nation's infrastructure is in critical condition. A well-funded NIB could be established with little fiscal strain. - Here's how: Establish an NIB in a manner similar to a quasi-governmental Investment Bank - thus permitting financial leverage. Allow the NIB to issue tax exempted bonds, which could then be sold to the Federal Reserve (I.e. Helicopter Money rather than pro-financial elite QE), to U.S. corporations (allowing tax exemption on repatriated profits invested in the NIB), and to U.S. households and pension funds.

4. Introduce a Comprehensive Social Capital Plan. - Could include investing more in labor training programs, higher education, R&D, and other areas critical to international competitiveness, innovation, new business creation, etc. Such could be done in a cost-effective manner with minimal fiscal strain. (Tuition rates are rising faster than inflation and should be contained. There's too much administrative waste and little to no reason books should be as expensive as is the case. Like health care, we spend more on higher education than other Western Nations with no additional return.) Trade assistance programs, labor training programs, and vocational education all provide another viable area for improving our global competitive position. R&D (Science) is another area we have, as a nation, collectively neglected (both in the public and private sectors). Additional R&D expenditure could be made with minimal fiscal strain if we charged companies (royalty) for patenting and marketing the results of public financed research.

5. Promote / require fairness in international trade and do whatever we can to promote stabilization and growth abroad. - We could, for ex., leverage our position to require China to further liberalize and open their sectors to our businesses, to establish a minimal level of labor protection, and to establish a minimal level of environmental protection - Revoking Normal Trade Relations and implementing anti-dumping tariffs / quotas as permitted under the WTO? Furthermore, we need to be promoting global stabilization and growth in a fair and sustainable fashion. Greater participation in Developmental Banking and / or / plus an International Marshall Plan (would provide new & immediate demand for our manufacturers + build critical and growth sustaining infrastructure in the developing world). The Marshall Plan, which reconstructed Western Europe, amounted to $130 billion in today's $'s. Such, and even more, could be financed - on an ongoing basis, with minimal fiscal strain - redirecting existing international aid, ending and redirecting corporate and agribusiness welfare, and using our position and voice within Developmental Banks, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. ISIS can be attributed to this: We invaded Iraq and did little to rebuild their nation and the infrastructure we bombed / dismantled. Well funded terrorists (ISIS) offered a source of guaranteed income. FDR: We have come to a clear realization of the fact, however, that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry, people who are out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. So, in addition to economic benefits, there are security benefits to investing in international reconstruction / construction / growth and stabilization.

6. Deregulation. Yes, I said deregulation. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default...mbargo.pdf Occupational licensing standards often do little to improve quality, while hindering growth, raising costs, and hindering new job creation. The same can be said for other regulations - such as those now being imposed on coal mining. We need to establish a National Commission, comprised of scholars and policy-makers, using cost-and-benefit analysis, to locate and remove regulations which undermine growth and competitiveness.

7. Real health care reform. No, I don't believe socialized medicine is the solution for our nation. I also don't think "Obama Care," written by and for the health insurance business, is the solution. However, we do need to contain costs and manage plus reduce demand and, in some instances, there is a role for state funded institutions (such as Public / Community Health Departments). Here's the solution:

Eliminate Income Tax Exemption (On Employer Provided Health Insurance Coverage): Resulting in an immediate $200 billion + in additional income tax revenue which, over time, would decline as it'd encourage businesses and consumers to provide / purchase lower priced plans. (Coverage levels are often too generous, unjustified, offered to avoid taxation, and encourage / facilitate overuse, over-billing, and waste.) https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center...FY2016.pdf

Nationalize the Health Insurance Exchange: requiring businesses and consumers to purchase from the exchange. Allow businesses & consumers to purchase into Medicare & Medicaid (Public Option) and allow our health insurers to compete across state lines. (Substitute state level standards and regulations with national standards and regulations.)

Expand and extend Medicaid Coverage in order to eliminate the need for ACA Premium Subsidization. (Between Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance, Medicaid is the cost-effective option): http://www.businessinsider.com/graph-med...ce-2013-12 Doing so would: provide better coverage and reduce / control expenditure. Additional reforms could be introduced to further control expenditure.

Introduce a National Health Info Sys and / or require Medical ID Card. Thousands of lives and a substantial sum could be saved if health care providers had access to immediate, comprehensive, and accurate information before treating an individual. (Such a program could also reduce prescription drug abuse.)

Investing in and mandating comprehensive preventative care: - such as imposing a tax on sugar / HFCS and / or high calorie food and using the revenue to establish free communal fitness centers and / or additional / improved recreational centers and programs, increased alcohol taxation / marijuana legalization and taxation, etc. to fund substance abuse and mental health programs, and other things / programs / initiatives of this nature.

8. Entitlement Reform - Yes, it's needed. Today's retirees and even, to a lesser degree, tomorrow's retirees, will receive more than was paid into Social Security & Medicare. People have less children and are living longer. It's basic math: Less people contributing relative to those who are receiving = NOT SUSTAINABLE. We need to reform those programs in a manner which would spare those who depend on them more from the pain / benefit reduction. (Introducing a new minimum guaranteed income for seniors, slowing benefit growth for those who receive more - as per the Simpson Bowles Commission, indexing to Chained-CPI, and cracking down on fraud, introducing Medicare cost-sharing and raising premiums for those who can and are able to contribute more.) Such comprehensive reform would: translate into long-term savings which could be used toward either deficit-reduction or investing in improving our infrastructure and / or improving social capital, restore confidence in our fiscal health (leading to a lower borrowing and servicing rate on our financial obligations / treasuries), and ensure the financial viability of those programs moving forward.

9. Redistribute income and wealth using market-oriented, tried and true methods: Yes, I know, redistribution strikes a horrible chord in this nation. However, our income and wealth distribution is no longer sustainable and redistribution can be conducted in a manner which generates additional income and wealth growth - even for those who are wealthier. - A Negative Income Tax would: encourage more men, women, youth, and seniors to join / remain in the workforce and would provide those with less income (who also tend to spend vs. save) with more disposable income. - A higher minimum wage ($10 an hour, indexed to inflation?) would raise the productive level of labor and improve the retention rate which, in turn, would reduce training costs and foster specialization and better customer service - the Costco Way on a national level - promoting share ownership with tax incentives for both employers and associates - such as an expanded and mandated national 401K / IRA Program, which would also lead to more wealth creation.

I like your plan overall, with a few objections. For number three, NIB securities should be sold international as well. Although corruption may be a definite problem, as long as the government has total control of the board of directors it will not matter. For number four, I do not think you go far enough. Most agencies in the USA are extremely corrupt, mostly because the government has little control over them, yet still funds them. Thus, a major reform to the higher education and healthcare system needs to be made, namely eliminating most subsidies and then erecting completely state controlled colleges with prices controlled(it can be controlled by some random agencies with directly elected leaders from congress.) In this way, colleges will finally have an incentive to lower prices and be more efficient overall, in order to remain afloat in the now highly competitive market. As for number five, labor does not need to be guaranteed by the government, rather the opportunity for labor needs to guaranteed, as in there is always demand. Now, there is a myriad of different industries, so let's stay specific on what you presumably refer to in China as the production of finished goods. To promote economic development, we merely need to result to age old tactics: protective tariffs, national banks, and massive investment in infrastructure. All else, including education, is not necessary, as if there is enough high paying jobs the intellect will come to us.(which is what we are seeing with STEM fields and its oversupply.) I completely agree with deregulation. Costs can be reduced by decreasing regulation and allowing tax exempts for new health-related businesses. Once the market has been reestablished, we recede.

27.02.2016 07:25
Quote this message in a reply
masterpierround
Junior Member
*


Posts: 28
Words count: 4,490
Group: Basic
Joined: Nov2014
Status: Offline
Reputation: 3
Experience: 352
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #7
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but in terms of the minimum wage, people will essentially spend all their wage money until they are being paid more than the living wage, correct? This seems logical to me, and to me, this means that if businesses are forced to pay their workers a wage close to the living wage, the money will simply come back to the businesses as sales. Can someone tell me either where my logic fails, or if it doesn't, why the US minimum wage is so far below the living wage in many places?

27.02.2016 17:37
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,963
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #8
RE: My view on how to fix the US economy(with some added assumptions and perspectives:)

masterpierround Wrote:
Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but in terms of the minimum wage, people will essentially spend all their wage money until they are being paid more than the living wage, correct? This seems logical to me, and to me, this means that if businesses are forced to pay their workers a wage close to the living wage, the money will simply come back to the businesses as sales. Can someone tell me either where my logic fails, or if it doesn't, why the US minimum wage is so far below the living wage in many places?

Your assumption is right. Poor people can't afford to save. Wages are not just a cost-component, they're also a demand-component. People bashing against the minimum wage ignore the demand-side of it. The minimum wage adds to Aggregate Demand. The minimum wage is not a living wage because (reasons). Involuntary unemployment & poverty are a tool with which capital "disciplines" labor. You don't like the conditions and the pay? Get out. There are plenty of people like you just dying to get this job. They don't like it to have it reversed on them. Oh, are you going to give me the job? Because there other employers out there just waiting for me to show up for an interview.
As a rule of thumb, a minimum wage increase ought to be passed with a reduction in fiscal drag & or with an increase in public spending.
For more info on the minimum wage, check out Bill Mitchell's article: Minimum Wages 101 http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=1010


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
27.02.2016 18:13
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  A Very Brief Summary of my opinionated view on government and econ. CommieScum 0 985 28.04.2017 22:01
Last Post: CommieScum
  A few simple steps to restore the American Economy to greatness again yangusbeef 4 1,217 14.12.2016 16:13
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Economy relies on excess debt in order to bootstrap Helsworth 0 1,356 16.12.2015 22:38
Last Post: Helsworth
  The "Angry Birds" Approach to Understanding Deficits in the Modern Economy Helsworth 0 1,670 16.06.2015 22:30
Last Post: Helsworth
  Ann Pettifor on Europe & Dean Baker on the US economy Helsworth 0 1,091 08.01.2015 18:02
Last Post: Helsworth
  How to Fuel the Economy Without Increasing Debt Helsworth 2 1,792 21.07.2014 09:06
Last Post: Helsworth
Toungue economy tonig 1 973 10.04.2014 18:41
Last Post: Helsworth
  The Green Economy and China's Economic Development Helsworth 1 1,302 27.01.2014 18:02
Last Post: TriniSary7
  Economy and Thermodynamics Rising Phoenix 0 1,009 24.10.2013 02:37
Last Post: Rising Phoenix
  MacroEconomic Conceptual Visualizations (How the real economy works) Helsworth 5 1,539 26.04.2013 08:05
Last Post: Khieu Samphan

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: