Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mack4289]

Is anyone else really surprised by this? I feel like I've been reading the exact opposite for years.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/24/business/bxbond.php?page=2

"Among the markets that say that President George W. Bush is doing a good job, the one he can take the most satisfaction from is U.S. Treasury bills.

That is because the unexpected surge in tax receipts may pare the budget deficit by 39 percent to $150 billion this fiscal year, causing a relative scarcity of four-week, three-month and six-month bills. The result is the biggest bull market for U.S. Treasury bills since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, drove investors to the safety of the securities.

Individual and corporate income tax revenues are growing for a fourth straight year in spite of five rounds of Bush tax cuts totaling about $2 trillion from 2001 to 2006. With less need to borrow, the government has slowed the sale of bills.

.... Through last Thursday, the government collected $1.59 trillion in individual and corporate income taxes, an increase of 7.7 percent from the same period a year earlier. Income tax revenue increased 16 percent in the fiscal year 2006, 21 percent in 2005, and 7.9 percent in 2003.

..... The deficit for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 was $148.5 billion at the end of May, 35 percent less than the shortfall of $227 billion in the same period a year earlier, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. For all of this year, the budget shortfall could narrow to $150 billion, the U.S. Congressional Budget Office said in May. That would be the smallest deficit since the United States posted a surplus in the fiscal year 2001.

The government reduced sales of bills in order to maintain the size of its note and bond auctions. While cutting the supply of bills in each of the past two fiscal years, the government increased the supply of notes and bonds by $262.9 billion in the fiscal year 2005 and $206 billion in 2006. Bills account for about 21 percent of the U.S. Treasury's $4.37 trillion in outstanding debt, the smallest share since October 2000."

[cbclark4]

The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them. (Lenny Bruce)

[khyber]

Joo:

[cbclark4]

A consumer dollar has more circulation than a taxed dollar.

When a dollar circulates through the economy it is exchanged several times and in fact taxed several times and becomes a profit figure several times.

So a dollar placed in the hands of the consumer allows the currency to circulate through the economy raising profits (which are taxed) so the higher the profit stream the more revenue is collected.

Lowering taxes puts more buying power in the hands of the consumer.
Raising taxes slows the circulation.

There are probably a bunch of big words and economics terms that could be used to explain this. There is even a term used to explain the speed or acceleration of currency in the spending cycle, but I can't remember much, but I think I understand the concept without the language.

Someone else may be able to give you a 'guns and butter' analogy.

I am no expert.

[faster]

Yes there may be a nice bit of progress on the deficit, but let's not forget that there was a budget SURPLUS when Bush took office. So the remaining deficit - quite a large number - is the NET deficit of Bush's presidency.

[khyber]

thanks cbc...
I basically understand that. I just wonder: Were the tax cuts for consumers sufficient enough to make that kind of impact?

[cbclark4]

[cbclark4]

[faster]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[thepeel]

I run a surplus in the bjwd household every month. It isn't hard. And I don't have the ability to monetize debt either.

[mack4289]

Yea can we start using these economic terms to describe our personal finances? This could be especially helpful if you want to confuse your better half about where the money is going ("Well the current fiscal deficit is deceiving unless you take into account promising signs from the futures market, not to mention the anticipated inflow of further investment sometime in the coming month...")

[faster]

[HyperPatriot]

The reason you "DON'T FEEL" the effects of this is because the Tax Cuts have only gone directly to the wealthy who have extremely good and stable jobs, as well as are part of the investor class.


These individuals have been able to *INVEST* their tax savings.



Contrary to what whoever said about "Consumer Dollars" -- these tax cuts were more about investments. The investment dollars went towards corporations that would be SUCCESSFUL.

SUCCESSFUL corporations hire people on the CHEAP.


Hence, what "YOU FEEL" is a hell of a lot of Part-Time Jobs and Low Wage Jobs being created -- as well as a lot of Off-Shoring.



Because of the pressures of Off-Shoring and Low Wage Jobs (justified by the threat of moving off-shore), it is now a requirement that Households have TWO full time workers.

Often this means multiple part-time jobs, or both parents having Low Wage Jobs.


This in turn, makes the *UNEMPLOYMENT RATE EXTREMELY LOW* and is declared a Victory by Conservatives, who consider this a good thing.

However, if both parents are forced to work, or someone has to have two jobs just to barely squeak by and still not be able to afford their own house or property, then the economy has FAILED.



This is why *YOU FEEL* cheated -- rightfully so.

You don't make less money -- but your standard of living goes DOWN.

And you DONT get a raise for a long, long, long time.

As your value in the company rises, you do get paid more, but that position MIGHT have made much, much more had there not been a low-wage competitive economy and off-shore threats.


And because SUCCESSFUL companies do pay taxes (as well as all the part-time labor and low cost labor pay their income tax), and because they produce cheap good bought by everyone around the world (if they are good enough and worth investing in -- and again, these are investor dollars) -- then what you find is a HUGE jump in *TAX* revenue.


We've basically created a 2-tier economy -- an Investor class and a Low Wage Labor class -- and the Bush Tax Cuts *DELIBERATELY* were meant to exacerbate and further deepen this situation.




Tax Cuts *COULD HAVE* been given to the Working Class, instead of the Investor Class.

Tax Revenue would have raised just as much in the Governments piggybank........ and more families would have been able to choose what to do with the money, instead of having a small class of millionaires choose for everybody what was to be done with the money.


But Conservatives don't believe in people anymore.

They are actually just a new form of Religio-Classist Socialists.


That's why they hate Ron Paul and his Libertarianism -- which is why he is not being invited by the Republican Party to the debates anymore, whereever they can block him -- they are doing so.

Why?

I just told you. The Republicans are now officially a Socialist Party, and they want nothing more to subsidize Religion and the Wealthy. Period. With actual tax money being delivered to both, without ANY kind of thought towards lowering it for those actually in need or who actually decide what to buy, based on their needs, in our society.

A lot is said about the "Trickle-Down" Economy by Republicans.


Good lord, they would freak out, if you suggested that a "Trickle-Up" Economy is better for America -- assuming you like us as a Strong People, instead of as merely a source of cheap-labor for America based Trans-national Corporations!


[HyperPatriot]

[thepeel]

How does Ron Paul fit into that?