Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: MNMikeW on 21 Dec 2009 11:15 "dsc-ky" <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote in message news:3f22b437-a10e-4c68-ade9-0f3bb341d67e(a)f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com... On Dec 19, 12:46 am, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > dsc-ky wrote, On 12/18/09 8:47 AM: > > > Hoarding is not really why there's a shortage of money in > > circulation... is it? > > Hoarding may not be the best verb, but overconcentration of > capital is a well-understood red flag for any market economy. > Economies with more equitable distribution of capital are > more robust, with more competition and fewer single points > of failure. Progressive taxation is the best and most > efficient brake against overconcentration, for a number > of reasons I'm too tired to list. (Any day that ends up > with my wife in the hospital is gonna be exhausting.) > > Americans, for all their puritanism about most other > deadly sins, have no issue with greed. But greed is a > sin for a reason. I'm not even going to say what my > idea of that reason is -- I think it's enough to say > that there's a good reason. There's a difference between > building financial security for one's family and > accumulating an obscene fortune, and until we can learn > to encourage the former while discouraging the latter, > we're going to have these problems. It seems to me that most of our problems are from people spending more than they have and taking big chances (houses, businesses, etc). Seems opposite of hoarding? ==================== Hoarding of ammo and Pro-Vs is still ok right?
From: MNMikeW on 21 Dec 2009 11:39 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b2da4b7$0$5078$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 03:01:09 +0000, assimilate wrote: >> On 18-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: >> >>>>> These are the ultra-elite I'm talking about here. We're talking >>>>> wealth that no one in this group can imagine *seeing*, much less >>>>> making in one year. In case you haven't been paying attention, they >>>>> run the country, and have been running it for awhile now. >>>> >>>> You're talking about the politics of envy. >>> >>> No envy. I'm just saying that a permanent oligarchy is bad for the >>> country. I sure as hell don't want to *be* part of the ruling elite. >> >> These words strike me as ironic coming from someone who's whole >> political world is financed by Soros > > That's about as meaningful as saying your entire political world is > financed by Murdoch. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977
From: MNMikeW on 21 Dec 2009 11:41 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b2ee266$0$5094$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:37:24 +0000, assimilate wrote: >> On 20-Dec-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> >>>> These words strike me as ironic coming from someone who's whole >>>> political world is financed by Soros >>> >>> That's about as meaningful as saying your entire political world is >>> financed by Murdoch. >> >> I don't see Murdoch plow his money into conservative pressure groups >> whereas Soros finances every progressive group around at the same time >> he is shorting the American economy, coicidence? > > Be serious. Murdoch owns a massive media empire that relentlessly hurls > propaganda at the American people day and night. It's mind-bottling that > you think Soros has anything even remotely like that level of influence. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977
From: dene on 21 Dec 2009 12:48 "dsc-ky" <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote in message news:0c58c886-a620-436c-b6b2-37700d008eed(a)r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com... On Dec 19, 11:09 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > assimil...(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/19/09 8:48 PM: > I don't think that is what he was saying or necessarily what would happen. If income taxes were dropped and we were allowed to keep that money and if the sales taxes were increases an appropriate amount... why would that necessarily discourage spending. It should be a wash in the end? The initial shock would be significant though. ------------------------------------------------------------------ A sales tax like you described would create a huge black market. -Greg
From: BAR on 21 Dec 2009 13:04
In article <7p9qe4FgpgU1(a)mid.individual.net>, dene(a)remove.ipns.com says... > > "dsc-ky" <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote in message > news:0c58c886-a620-436c-b6b2-37700d008eed(a)r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 19, 11:09 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > assimil...(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/19/09 8:48 PM: > > > > > I don't think that is what he was saying or necessarily what would > happen. If income taxes were dropped and we were allowed to keep that > money and if the sales taxes were increases an appropriate amount... > why would that necessarily discourage spending. It should be a wash in > the end? The initial shock would be significant though. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > A sales tax like you described would create a huge black market. Many businesses would be operating unadvertised drive-thru's and there would be an increase in lost and damaged merchandise. Soon the punitive VAT would be instituted as the only way to stop the black market. |