1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Economic Solution

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Chip, Feb 6, 2009.

  1. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As the descending economic spiral continues, and the attempt to throw a pig at the problem leaves us really porked, ... before every American is summarily dismissed from work, disappears from the bankrupt jobless rolls and America becomes a semi-worthless vacation colony of Dubai ... I thought it was probably about time that we put what's left of our heads together and really solve this problem.

    My personal solution involves translating the psyches of NBA teams into a mathematical presentation that reveals a model for choosing the winning play roughly 84% of the time over approximately 210 plays/season, a 17% improvement over the very rarely achieved top average of 67% annually over just 90 plays/season, thus allowing the bettor to bet 50% of his bankroll on every play until his bankroll extends to the stars, give these plays to every American, and let them suck all the off-shore dollars back into America, halting mortgage defaults, reducing unemployment insurance drain, restoring tax coffers, providing investment capital, ... and we're back in business.

    However, all fantasy aside ...

    ... Let's first get a grip on the reality of the present problem.

    Over-inflated stock and debt securities came due and their hollow nature collapsed upon presentation. Arguably self-sabotaged lenders reacted anally. People lost billions ... including those who employ millions and who thus began responding with layoffs in quantum waves. The more consumers with thereby less dollars to spend cost corporations their projected sales ... resulting in more layoffs ... resulting in more lost sales ... resulting in more layoffs ... ... .

    So before its deja vu buddy can you spare a dime time all over again, how do we halt this deadly spiral and start things back on an upward trend?

    Some say we shouldn't allow ARMs and futures speculation. Well, okay, but maybe next time, as what's done is done, and we can't just wish this foundational aspect of our present problem away.

    We need to find a way to put money into consumers' pockets and in sufficient quantities that consumers will spend an adequate percentage of it on ... ... well, more on that later.

    The first question is how to get that money into consumers' pockets.

    Did someone say "jobs"?

    Okay, let's go there, I mean, why not, it seems rational ... though with jobs disappearing faster than jobs in a pending American depression, what rich fairy's magic wand is powerful enough to poof us some new ones?

    Which brings us to the FDR method, pork optional, presently being experimented in Washington.

    Some say that saved us seventy years ago ... others say it merely slowed the system from recovering ... some say it prevented worse carnage ... others say it extended the number of sufferers ... ... . Regardless, we worked our equal-gender asses off during the WWII forties, which probably had a lot to do with the comfortable fifties ... until we boomed our population over an economically manageable level ... ... but regardless, the jury may perhaps be out on the FDR model, sans trichinosis, though that model includes a 90% upper-echelon tax bracket the Gates and Buffets of today may find a bit unappealing.

    Then there's those Gates and Buffets themselves -- private investors who would be called upon to voluntarily give freely of their riches to start new ventures that would re-train old American dogs and employ them once again. But, of course, if it's optional ... and their heads are somewhere in Africa ... ... .

    So how are we to create jobs without the money to create them?

    And what products and services would these jobs provide?

    Other than creating new jobs -- I mean jobs that pay a living wage, not CCC type communal crap -- jobs that appear to be a declining species in this Neanderthal economic system, how do we get money into American pockets?

    Well, some say we have plenty of jobs already (What???) Yeah, there's plenty of jobs, we just aren't employing the right people. (How's that again?)

    Well, look ... where have all our manufacturing jobs gone? (Duh ... ) China, that's right, among others. All these American manufacturing jobs that could pay a living wage have just disappeared. And what about our computer programmers? (India, The Philippines, Santiago Chile?) You're catching on. Accountants, corporate customer service, etc. etc. -- all gone. And we import so much finished goods any more, where once at best we imported the raw materials and self-sufficiently built our own stuff.

    And if off-shoring and out-sourcing aren't bad enough, the in-sourcing is really killing us: importing of cheap foreign labor to America is costing us greater than most are aware. Pretty soon foreign nationals working in America will be the majority!

    And why do we suffer this American job-drain? Because it's good for corporations, and what's good for corporations is good for America, right? Well, perhaps ... if you don't mind American individuals themselves nobly disappearing painfully like a brontosaurus in a meteor storm.

    And just why the heck do we allow countries like Saudi Arabia to buy our stocks?! Do we really want them owning that big a chunk of our precious CEOs? I shudder to think ... .

    Indeed, some say the solution requires some drastic nationalistic overtones with a background chorus of economic socialism.

    Maybe. After all, it's worked before ... though the trick would be to this time avoid the holocaustic sacrificing of the attendant "evil devils".

    But are there any other solutions that don't involve foreign national deportation, returning manufacturing et al to our soil, government buy-up of foreign-owned stock, and other isolationist behaviors necessary to lick our wounds for the time being before those wounds become fatal?

    Again, whatever the solution, the bottom line is the individual American: the individual American's suffering must be abated before too many fall off the edge of Maslow's Hierarchy of Need. If the individual American citizen can become a living wage earner again, and soon, a devastating perhaps country-ending depression may be averted.

    How do we do that?

    That's my question.

    Got answers?

    Our very lives may depend on us.
     
  2. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah........​

     
  3. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
  4. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A link to an Obama partisan speech complete with teaser quote about what he thinks "won't work" is not a dialogue post about what you think will work.

    If you think Obama's public works FDR-type solution will work, please state why in your own words in articulate detail.

    We need dialogue here, ladies and gentlemen, not party pandering links.
     
  5. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't understand your question in relationship to the effect of your link that merely reports understandable recessionary unemployment.

    What did what to Canada? Does your intended allusion help us to solve our version of the problem here in the U.S.? If so, how?

    And I reiterate, ladies and gentlemen, please limit the "speaks for me" links -- what we need are problem-solving ideas from forum members expressed in their own words with articulate detail.

    Thank you.
     
  6. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It was more a question for "Mr." Shaman. Since Canada's a more liberal country to begin with, what has caused their problem? George Bush? Our Congress?

    The problem is global. It's systemic. Conservative and Liberal countries alike are both suffering. This points to... what?
     
  7. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, everyone is suffering, and for a number of interrelated reasons.

    So ... what is your suggested recovery solution?
     
  8. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm not exactly sure there is one.
     
  9. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Don't worry, though--"Mr." Shaman will no doubt point the way within a few minutes and All Will Be Well.

    Or, at least, deride someone for their lack of vision--that's always helpful!
     
  10. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How often do you folks need to be told?????

    What's the point of articulation, when "conservatives" are so-often stricken with voluntary-deafness?

    :confused:
     
  11. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Am I good, or what?
     
  12. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Anybody else?
     
  13. spost7

    spost7 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My question is for Mr. Shaman,

    Why do you find this president such a god send in 3 weeks following his inception and nothing being changed materially in Washington?
     
  14. spost7

    spost7 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not only that, but I have read some of your other replys and I would really be concerned with how well spoken and articulate our current president is too. Oh...... that's right we just lost 75,000 jobs yesterday and the day before that, and the day before that, and the day before that. But, our president sure can talk good........
     
  15. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Okay, to get more serious, you'd need to correctly identify causality. And you might want to understand some things about wealth distribution so let's start with the Pareto principle, or the "80-20 Rule", which basically says that 80% of the wealth will be in the hands of 20% of the populus. Therefore, we get a distribution curve like this:

    [​IMG]

    ...where 80% of the area under the curve is under the last 20% of the x-axis. The exponential to produce the curve is: y=x^6.214 The x-axis is the population starting from the poorest on the left to the richest on the right (there's no significance to that, by the way). The y-axis is wealth. Now, this principle has been in effect for... a long time. Pretty much regardless of where and when you go. It's virtually immutable. Liberal "dogma" taken at face value promotes the possibility that the exponential can be reduced. The fact that it never has been substantially in anything other than aboriginal societies is... telling.

    Okay, so some more supporting data... how about tax returns filed with the IRS? Okay, for tax year 2006, we can produce a distribution curve that's based on only the returns filed. A substantial share of them didn't pay taxes and the dependents aren't part of the distribution. Here's the curve:

    [​IMG]

    Can't say for an absolute certainty until I process the data, but as an educated guess I'd say that when the household size (total number of dependents) per income bracket curve is infused into that curve (data here), it's going to go a long way towards making the lower plot match the upper plot. All that to say that the 80-20 Rule stands. Since it was originally noted in Europe, I think we can safely assume that it's going to match there as well.

    Now, assuming an immutable economic distibution of wealth, let's try to imagine a few things about the economy. For it to actually expand, there would have to be an exponential infusion of energy or efficiency gains, one or the other. In point of fact, primary energy production (oil, coal, gas, nuclear, renewables, etc.) has not been exponentially keeping pace with demand due to a widening population base that actually uses said energy. That's the real problem. Yes, you can produce it, but we're spending more of that energy looking for more than we used to. It's a drain. I'll eventually work up a mathematical representation of that.
     
Loading...

Share This Page