In my own humble opinion, there are basically just two all-powerful forces that are pounding the US and the rest of the Western world into the ground: mass third world immigration, and free-trade. Were it not for these two phenomena, phrases like "enjoy the decline" would be nothing more than wishful thinking by Western society's losers and/or envious third worlders. With these forces in full effect however, "enjoy the decline" is a matter of fact. Immigration is not related to this thread so I'll speak only of free trade.

Basically, free trade as it has existed for the past several decades is a massive wealth transfer from Western societies to developing (chiefly Asian) countries, with a tiny faction of Westerners (the financial and corporate elites) pocketing some of that wealth in the form of rising corporate profits. An earlier poster in this thread correctly observed that "free trade" has lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese-and before that, Koreans and Japanese-out of abject poverty and set that country on a course towards developing a prosperous industrial economy.

Well guess what. Those Asians didn't pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Asian, and developing world in general, economic growth is based off of parasitic, mercantilist trade policies whose sole objective is to send as much cheap crap Westwards as possible, while at the same time closing off their own markets to any Western goods aside from A) commodities or B) shit they absolutely positively can't make on their own for lack of know-how, like commercial jets etc.

The effects of all this on the global balance of economic growth have been predictable. Asian economies have exploded, while the West has endured decades of economic stagnation. Living standards have not risen in living memory, and by most objective measure have actually fallen. Even under the most rose-tinted view, Western economies have barely been treading water since at least the 90s, and this despite an ever growing leverage ratio. Well, no shit, how can an economy grow when all the factors of production continually migrate to the east and south?

When a Chinese guy buys an Iphone with cash, that money is transferred back to the Chinese economy via more employment at Chinese Iphone factories and other ripple effects. When an American buys an Iphone with credit-because of course-that money is transferred back to the Chinese economy via employment at Chinese Iphone factories and other ripple effects. That's why in China, the economy grows, while in America, the FED is on Quantitative Easing IX. But hey, at least we have "freedom" and Fuckerbergs social network, both of which are banned across the Pacific.

Quote: (08-01-2014 05:10 PM)puckerman Wrote:  

What has happened to Mark Cuban? This is a man who once read Ayn Rand's novel The Fountainhead. He's the owner of the Dallas Mavericks and is one of the most maverick owners in the history of sports. He criticizes officials and sits courtside wearing t-shirts.

Lately he's become politicially correct. I used to have a Facebook group called "Draft Mark Cuban for President." I don't feel that way anymore.

Just look at his tweet. It's pure socialist drivel. He argued somewhere else that these corporations make taxes "higher" for the rest of us:

Wanting protectionist trade policies is "socialist drivel"?

So I guess that America must've been a socialist nation until the early 1990s. Japan, Korea, Germany, and Taiwan also must be socialist nations too.

Quote: (08-01-2014 11:30 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Ay:



No - seriously. Libertarianism was financed by the trillionaires of our world (or billionaires if you still think that the Rothschilds and Rockefellers really lost or gave away their money).

Free trade is a scam. Anything that a country can produce within should be done within its' own borders, because it gives the people a chance to survive in our system.

This is just a giant ad-hominem backed by conspiracy theories.

If libertarianism was created by the rich for the rich it is quite peculiar that the libertarian party receives almost zero funding by the rich and the large corporations. No, the rich and large corporations all fund left/right parties.

Surely all the rich came out of the woodworks in droves to support Ron Paul when they had the chance. Oh wait, almost none did.

Quote: (08-02-2014 05:01 AM)Ping Wrote:  

This is just a giant ad-hominem backed by conspiracy theories.

If libertarianism was created by the rich for the rich it is quite peculiar that the libertarian party receives almost zero funding by the rich and the large corporations. No, the rich and large corporations all fund left/right parties.

Surely all the rich came out of the woodworks in droves to support Ron Paul when they had the chance. Oh wait, almost none did.

Read and weep - no conspiracies here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis...89x1989989

http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012...economics/

http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2014...o-move-on/

You have to realize that libertarianism only sounds good on paper. Real life application of its policies would bankrupt a country within 2-4 years. If you read their papers you find out that some libertarian economists have been supporting child labor and a free market for children where parents should have the right to sell their children to the highest bidder. Behind the pretty words of freedom lies a ruthless dod-eat-dog system that even the current plutocracy cannot implement, because there would be lynch mobs waiting for them within 2 years.

There are many sites like http://recoveringaustrians.wordpress.com/ which have especially targeted Austrian Economics sites and Libertarian pushers. Usually they have to close their comment section after a time due to the faulty logic behind their models - usury and fractional reserve banking left untouched, markets completely open (while US was highly protected for most of its history - Japan, China still are), no restrictions on labor etc.

Frankly I too thought that at one time that Austrian Economics and Ron Paul sounded like new fresh ideas out of this. However after some more digging it became clear that it was a ruse anyway and a win would have been even worse.

Quote: (08-02-2014 05:15 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Read and weep - no conspiracies here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis...89x1989989

http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012...economics/

http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2014...o-move-on/

You have to realize that libertarianism only sounds good on paper. Real life application of its policies would bankrupt a country within 2-4 years. If you read their papers you find out that some libertarian economists have been supporting child labor and a free market for children where parents should have the right to sell their children to the highest bidder. Behind the pretty words of freedom lies a ruthless dod-eat-dog system that even the current plutocracy cannot implement, because there would be lynch mobs waiting for them within 2 years.

There are many sites like http://recoveringaustrians.wordpress.com/ which have especially targeted Austrian Economics sites and Libertarian pushers. Usually they have to close their comment section after a time due to the faulty logic behind their models - usury and fractional reserve banking left untouched, markets completely open (while US was highly protected for most of its history - Japan, China still are), no restrictions on labor etc.

Frankly I too thought that at one time that Austrian Economics and Ron Paul sounded like new fresh ideas out of this. However after some more digging it became clear that it was a ruse anyway and a win would have been even worse.

Democracticundergrand and a blog where all the topics involve bashing capitalism and linking it to a jewish conspiracy. Great sources, I am now convinced. Maybe you will link me to Alex Jones next time for the unbiased truth.

Some libertarians saying/belivieng things you consider wrong/bad does not invalidate libertarian theory. If you examine any political philosophy you will find beliefs and views that by most standards are despicable.

There is a blog that critizes austrian economics? Yes, retard, there are blogs criticizing everything. It means very little.

You are just regurgitating anti-libertarian rethoric without substance. Making grand statements are not arguments. Try to actually make cohorent and valid points.

Quote: (08-02-2014 06:15 AM)Ping Wrote:  

Yes, retard, there are blogs criticizing everything.

This is not how to discuss here via vapid insults. I was linking to articles which linked to actual references that can be verified, but that kind of attack is just plain wrong. On this forum we may disagree - sometimes vehemently, but we are trying to keep things civil. Otherwise we might just as well go and talk things over at Jizzabell. Same experience.

And personally I respect libertarians, since I know where they are coming from - some of them are my friends. Those belief systems have little impact on real life experiences and the fun times one can have together, as long as you don't push your opinions every bloody second of the day. We usually agree on 90% of things anyway.

Talk over.

The US would be a much more powerful country if it locked down its borders and actually focused on protecting its internal labor force. Let deflation occur and re-org the entire country. Letting our own labor force compete with slave labor is what will bring this country to its humbling feet.

Comparitive advantage is bull$hit when the russians decide not to sell you rockets anymore and China (who has your manufacturing power) stops shipping to you.

Mark Cuban's post is a step in the right direction.

Immigration is a herring. America would be completely dead with out it. Nobody realize that Americana can't even barley re-populate itself. Nobody also realizes that for Tony the random Mexican peasant, your also getting Engineers, nurses, and other professionals coming trough the gate whom pay big money to dance through hoops to gain citizenship.

America was built on immigrants, your are one yourself. It's propaganda that has been fed to hate immigrants. UK cant think the same thing. They (the UK) would be a third would nation without its open borders and it's ability to print money after the fact. Without immigration they and the USA's best scenario would be comatose Japan with a destroyed and depleted population base and next to no economic growth. If you don't want you country like that then stop hating on immigration.

Immigration is trade just like all else. America imports still the vast and largest amount of human capabilities from across the globe and extracts productivity from them. All ends up swirling into debt to keep the "American way" chugging along.

---

Lastly, yes. Libertarianism was a ruse founded by wealthy elite. Same with feminism and deep ecology (radical environmentalism), all have the end goals of bringing back feudalism by aiding to steal wealth away from the only ones capable of protecting it. Men.

A simple lesson is that any counter movement that poses a real and legitimate threat to the power structure is stomped out and challenged with force. All one has to do is look back at the urban black America uprisings in the 60s and 70s. That was the physical and gorilla complement to the already large legitimate revolutionary forces present in America at the time; which crossed class, race, and ideological lines. How did the power structure respond to the most radical sects of this movement? With 'the boot' of course. In a 10 year span police and intelligence killed and poached of leadership from groups within the Black panthers and SNCC. Groups such as MOVE were ambushed and bombed like foreign invaders on American soil. That is what a real response to counter forces looks like. Any counter force or ideology that isn't challenged is supported and propped up by the establishment. Period. That is simple red pill stuff that you should always keep in the back of your mind. Nothing wrong with having affinity to some ideals of what ever ideology you so choose, just be hesitant in viewing sigh ideas as a "solution", as it isn't one.

Quote: (08-02-2014 07:43 AM)kosko Wrote:  

Immigration is a herring. America would be completely dead with out it. Nobody realize that Americana can't even barley re-populate itself. Nobody also realizes that for Tony the random Mexican peasant, your also getting Engineers, nurses, and other professionals coming trough the gate whom pay big money to dance through hoops to gain citizenship.

America was built on immigrants, your are one yourself. It's propaganda that has been fed to hate immigrants. UK cant think the same thing. They (the UK) would be a third would nation without its open borders and it's ability to print money after the fact. Without immigration they and the USA's best scenario would be comatose Japan with a destroyed and depleted population base and next to no economic growth. If you don't want you country like that then stop hating on immigration.

The irony is that the UK and USA will become third world countries because of immigration! When you flood first world countries with millions of third world immigrants, that first world country becomes more third world.

There are parts of Europe now that look like the Middle East. There are parts of the US that look like Central America. The Middle East and Central America are not lovely places to live. East Los Angeles is a terrible community.

We should be highly discriminatory over who we let into our countries. We should only allow small numbers in at a time, make sure they are able to contribute immediately, and naturalize them. We should not be flooding our countries with third world peasants.

Quote: (08-02-2014 07:43 AM)kosko Wrote:  

Immigration is a herring. America would be completely dead with out it. Nobody realize that Americana can't even barley re-populate itself. Nobody also realizes that for Tony the random Mexican peasant, your also getting Engineers, nurses, and other professionals coming trough the gate whom pay big money to dance through hoops to gain citizenship.

America was built on immigrants, your are one yourself. It's propaganda that has been fed to hate immigrants....

No one should blame immigrants for anything - especially since in all likelihood the majority of guys here are at least the sons of immigrants.

The problem is that with real 20% unemployment there is simply no need for immigation. Don't believe the official statistics. IF unemployment were calculated as in 1980 - the numbers would be like this:

   

People leave their countries because their own countries' economies were first destroyed via free trade (in Mexico competition of food imports subsidized by the American taxpayer) and other things forcing the people to look elsewhere for survival.

With a less predatory more sensible-tariffs-focused system all those people would be able to make a living in their homecountries. Very few people actually want to move from the country they are born, unless their very survival is threatened.

The plutocracy wants immigraton for different reasons than the fake talking points given:

- wage pressure and thus lower wages
- decrease of unity of population (in the past people were encouraged to integrate and feel American ASAP - not anymore - embrace your difference) - that will make any rebellion impossible since the people won't have much in common between the individual groups

A diverse population is actually by far more pliable than a uniform one. The same thing is happening to the EU currently flooding Europe with immigrants they know will have a hard time integrating. (Most of them Muslim. Strangely African Christians integrate excellently as seen in Germany - I met a few of them and they are like black Germans with no behavioral distinctions to blonde Germans at all.)

While I have mixed feelings about free trade, I will ultimately come to its defense in this reply since everyone else has taken a protectionist point of view. As a neoreactionary, I am pretty much for free trade and staunchly anti-immigration. I made a simple case for the anti-immigration part in a previous post on this thread but also here is another: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-38229-...#pid782610

Now to defend free trade.

Let's be honest with ourselves: we do not have real free trade in the United States. Corporations have created a nice little racket for themselves so that they have privatized the gains of trade but socialized the losses.

First off, trade reduces likeliness for war. Protectionist policies can lead to trade wars, which can lead to actual wars. If we have strong trade relations with a foreign power, we are less likely to go to war because both sides have a lot to lose economically. Trade embargoes are what led to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Secondly, free trade permits specialization. Countries can devote their scarce resources to developing goods that they have a comparative advantage in producing. So if China is the best at making widgets and the USA is the best at making trinkets, then each country can devote its resources towards the production of the goods that they are good at making instead of splitting the resources to develop both in each country. We can trade our trinkets for their widgets and vice versa. The absolute quantity of goods produced will be greatest under free trade conditions.

Thirdly, consumers benefit from free trade instead of governments. When you have tariffs in place, prices of those goods will go up. You are indirectly taxing your own citizens in order to encourage them to purchase inferior (or more expensive) domestic goods. This money enriches the government at the expense of the citizens (and I hate the government). Free trade gives your citizens access to goods at the lowest prices possible, leaving them with extra money at their disposal. With this money they could purchase other goods or services in your country or they could save/invest it.

I am no fan of outsourcing but that has more to do with government taxation/regulations on corporations than it does with tariffs and trade barriers.

Quote: (08-01-2014 05:24 PM)monster Wrote:  

That's not socialist. That's accountability. He's absolutely right.

The middle class (80% of america) gets taxed at 30-40%.

Corporations, who earn billions of dollars, fleece the system, promote excessive materialism and profit off government contracts pay a rate of 5%. They do this through funneling profits made in America offshore and various other mechanisms.

Corporations have consistently and effictively lobbied for millions of tax loopholes. Corporations profit and gain much more from American than Americans gain from their own country as individuals.

Cuban is absolutely right to suggest that corporations start paying some fucking taxes with the rest of us.

Source of 5%, please? The U.S. has the highest statutory corporate tax rate In. The. World. 35%. Plus state taxes on top of that! So a company in New York pays over 40%.

"Oh, but there are all these super-secret DEDUCTIONS!!". Like what? Look at the effective tax rates of most profitable companies - 35% or more.

Don't be naïve about how you look at this. My ex-father-in-law, a true socialist, once saw a company that had $100M in profits and paid no taxes. And of course he was outraged. And I pointed out that LAST year the company LOST $100M, and they used the loss carryforwards to offset this year's income. Total corporate income over two years? $0. Total taxes payable on that? Obviously, $0.

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

People who lambast the "big, bad corporations" for their financial success are usually 1) unsuccessful and 2) not terribly informed. IMO.

edit: This isn't to say corporations don't do some nasty shit. Political correctness, job quotas, diversity agendas, etc. But to say they are under-taxed when 1) the rise in our standard of living the last 50 years is largely a result of technological progress that requires SCALE to achieve and 2)all other industrial countries have far lower tax rates is simply arguing from an unknowledgeable position.

Quote: (08-02-2014 06:52 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 06:15 AM)Ping Wrote:  

Yes, retard, there are blogs criticizing everything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8zVhl1SS60

Its called Nationalism. Something that has been beaten out of you by the corporate agenda driven conservative media, namely, News Corp. Something Americans dont have, which is why the culture here has changed so dramatically in the last 30 years. If you dont believe in this country, you can get a far better deal for your money e.g. taxes, in many other countries like New Zealand and Russia.

OP - If your such a big proponent of this, why don't you yourself put your money where your mouth is and move somewhere else in the world where you can pay fewer taxes. Maybe its just easier be a corporate cheerleader, because its on the TV. Its easy for a Foxnews contributor who lives on the upper east side, who herself would never step her red bottom Louie B's into an icky factory, let alone know anyone in her family who depended on the manufacturing base.

Conservatives are always faced with these intellectual dilemmas. On one hand you're pro American, on the other your pro business. Multinational corporations are agnostic, to religion, borders and culture. On one hand your waving the flag and saying love America, on the other your cheerleading for companies who continually move more of their manufacturing off shore and weaken the industrial base of this country, turning our small towns and midwestern cities into wastelands, creating the service and IP economies, which, ultimately produce weaker, more beta cubicle dwellers and fast food consumers. We are not the strong proud country we once were. But not connecting the dots because is your fault.

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

While I agree with you that its harder and harder for companies to do business in this country, lets look at the bigger picture. What has all of this support of government earned the business community? When will it end, and who will come along to change it? Anything short of a Reagan revolution wont fix a thing. Both sides of the aisle are guilty. Companies need to stay here and sway influence to fix it from within, without running off with thousands of jobs.

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:53 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

Yes. I want to see a 5% effective tax rate. QE2 is not an effective tax rate. Even the graphs above, which show effective rates in the teens and 20's, show that RECENTLY - i.e, in an economic downturn with lower profitability. Look at the 2005-2006 timeframe, i.e., a more normal economy. But in no case do I see anything close to the number you appear to have made up. Which is what liberals do: Make shit up because they are butthurt. Don't do it. You're better than that.

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:59 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:53 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

Yes. I want to see a 5% effective tax rate. QE2 is not an effective tax rate. Even the graphs above, which show effective rates in the teens and 20's, show that RECENTLY - i.e, in an economic downturn with lower profitability. Look at the 2005-2006 timeframe, i.e., a more normal economy. But in no case do I see anything close to the number you appear to have made up. Which is what liberals do: Make shit up because they are butthurt. Don't do it. You're better than that.

I didnt make the number up here, but corporate welfare exists to a large degree, you would probably agree with that. You're going to say that billions in "relief" dont affect a companies bottom line?

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:04 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:59 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:53 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

Yes. I want to see a 5% effective tax rate. QE2 is not an effective tax rate. Even the graphs above, which show effective rates in the teens and 20's, show that RECENTLY - i.e, in an economic downturn with lower profitability. Look at the 2005-2006 timeframe, i.e., a more normal economy. But in no case do I see anything close to the number you appear to have made up. Which is what liberals do: Make shit up because they are butthurt. Don't do it. You're better than that.

I didnt make the number up here, but corporate welfare exists to a large degree, you would probably agree with that. You're going to say that billions in "relief" dont affect a companies bottom line?

Sure, there are lots of opportunities to remove inefficiencies in the tax code. But couple that with much lower rates - say the 21% they have in the UK. The whole impact should be revenue neutral - lower rates, fewer deductions, more transparency. That's the opposite of what big-govt types want: Corporate welfare for certain politically correct companies (Solyndra, anyone??).

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:11 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:04 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:59 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:53 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

Yes. I want to see a 5% effective tax rate. QE2 is not an effective tax rate. Even the graphs above, which show effective rates in the teens and 20's, show that RECENTLY - i.e, in an economic downturn with lower profitability. Look at the 2005-2006 timeframe, i.e., a more normal economy. But in no case do I see anything close to the number you appear to have made up. Which is what liberals do: Make shit up because they are butthurt. Don't do it. You're better than that.

I didnt make the number up here, but corporate welfare exists to a large degree, you would probably agree with that. You're going to say that billions in "relief" dont affect a companies bottom line?

Sure, there are lots of opportunities to remove inefficiencies in the tax code. But couple that with much lower rates - say the 21% they have in the UK. The whole impact should be revenue neutral - lower rates, fewer deductions, more transparency. That's the opposite of what big-govt types want: Corporate welfare for certain politically correct companies (Solyndra, anyone??).

The problem currently is multi-faceted, and deeply rooted into the very fabric of this country. Unions, entitlement, the very view on governments role in a persons life. No one has come along in the last thirty years to reeducate people on this. And thats why it has to be the private sector. Politicians have failed here, they are completely owned by lobbyists. Lets face it, we are Europe, we are a socialist country. To deny that is idealistic, but not dealing in reality. When I see a company pull up its roots, or on life support like Kodak, I see another chink in our armor. I blame that on government policy, and throwing up the white flag.

When you say,

Quote:Quote:

People who lambast the "big, bad corporations"

are losers, I completely disagree. When I see big government bad types these days I see sheltered low earning people alone in their living rooms watching Foxnews 24/7. Like my parents.

When the people and business community decide they have had enough they will make a change. We are not there yet. I think thats what Cuban is trying to say.

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:21 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:11 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 11:04 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:59 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:53 AM)Vaun Wrote:  

Corporate welfare and tax incentives certainly factor into this. QE1, QE2, QE3, do you want me to keep going?

Yes. I want to see a 5% effective tax rate. QE2 is not an effective tax rate. Even the graphs above, which show effective rates in the teens and 20's, show that RECENTLY - i.e, in an economic downturn with lower profitability. Look at the 2005-2006 timeframe, i.e., a more normal economy. But in no case do I see anything close to the number you appear to have made up. Which is what liberals do: Make shit up because they are butthurt. Don't do it. You're better than that.

I didnt make the number up here, but corporate welfare exists to a large degree, you would probably agree with that. You're going to say that billions in "relief" dont affect a companies bottom line?

Sure, there are lots of opportunities to remove inefficiencies in the tax code. But couple that with much lower rates - say the 21% they have in the UK. The whole impact should be revenue neutral - lower rates, fewer deductions, more transparency. That's the opposite of what big-govt types want: Corporate welfare for certain politically correct companies (Solyndra, anyone??).

The problem currently is multi-faceted, and deeply rooted into the very fabric of this country. Unions, entitlement, the very view on governments role in a persons life. No one has come along in the last thirty years to reeducate people on this. And thats why it has to be the private sector. Politicians have failed here, they are completely owned by lobbyists. Lets face it, we are Europe, we are a socialist country. To deny that is idealistic, but not dealing in reality. When I see a company pull up its roots, or on life support like Kodak, I see another chink in our armor. I blame that on government policy, and throwing up the white flag.

When you say,

Quote:Quote:

People who lambast the "big, bad corporations"

are losers, I completely disagree. When I see big government bad types these days I see sheltered low earning people alone in their living rooms watching Foxnews 24/7. Like my parents.

When the people and business community decide they have had enough they will make a change. We are not there yet. I think thats what Cuban is trying to say.

Those are interesting and nuanced points and I am glad you shared them. Your perspective is much broader than I first thought.

I am not going to ascribe any motivation to what Cuban was trying to say. I tend to agree with the posters who said he's just pandering to the masses. He is a VERY smart dude - and therefore likely knows better than "America good, ROW bad!". In fact, I would argue that the CEO of a company who DIDN'T maximize profits - whether by introducing superior products, optimizing the company's tax planning, or other means - is violating his fiduciary responsibilities to his shareholders: His board of directors didn't put him there for "the greater good of 'merica". They put him there to maximize return to shareholders. If he doesn't do that, he is shirking. In an extreme case, he could be sued for breaching his fiduciary responsibilities to his shareholders.

Quote: (08-02-2014 10:00 AM)The Father Wrote:  

Your 5% rate doesn't stand up to knowledgeable analysis. Show me where you get 5%.

I'm not the person that was asked this question and I'm not sure which study was referenced. Most of the times I've seen this type of argument, it's usually the current US tax paid in a given year applied against some sort of global book income, which is a completely different calculation.

In the studies I read a few years ago, the difference was largely that other countries taxed a foreign subsidiary at the (lower) local rate, and since that income wasn't moved to the US that year, there was no US tax paid on that income. That's not the calculation I'd use to make an argument.

There's a lot of negative things to be said about the current US Corporate Income Tax system without applying two numbers against each other that aren't based on the same underlying transactions.

Quote: (08-01-2014 06:09 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Quote: (08-01-2014 05:16 PM)objectivist tree Wrote:  

Most people are too dumb to see the benefit in things like off-shoring or free trade.

There is no benefit to off-shoring or free trade to the domestic U.S. economy and U.S. citizens. Off-shoring and free trade simply provide short term economic benefits to the owners of corporations, who can take advantage of cheap foreign labor to lower their costs and increase their profits. Of course, over the long term this obviously destroys the domestic labor force, which is exactly what's been happening in the U.S. for decades now. This results in economic destruction all around, as the consumer base depends on people having decent jobs in order to afford goods. The result is that companies that heavily offshore and take advantage of free trade end up killing off their own domestic customer base over time.

Free trade is literally a complete and utter economic scam. There has never been an economy that has become fully developed with free trade rules in place. There simply has to be some protectionist elements in place in order for domestic industries to escape the infancy stage without being crushed by foreign competition. Every great economy started out heavily protected, including the United States. Free trade is pushed heavily today for two simple reasons: 1) It provides substantial short term growth prospects for large corporations, 2) It allows developed economies to exploit poor countries for their resources and cheap labor. The only winners from free trade are people at the top. Working people in rich and poor countries end up screwed - workers in the developed economies lose their jobs, and workers in poor countries labor in terrible conditions for pennies on the dollar. International corporations end up controlling the production in most third world countries, meaning those countries are never able to develop their own economies. This is all exacerbated by "development" loans from the IMF and World Bank, which result in these countries getting into massive debt and being forced to sell off their resources and production ownership to foreigners.

Anyone who thinks "the economy" is more important than the health of the nation is foolish and shortsighted, especially since "the economy" is always measured in things like GDP, corporate profits and stock prices, rather than on median annual income, quality of living and inflation. If a country is going to be anything more than a place to make money, then absolutely must make preserving its domestic economic production the cornerstone of its long term economic policy. This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism, it's simply a recognition that nations have an interest in preserving the health of their economies.

Here's a good book for anyone who wants to get red pilled on free trade: http://www.amazon.com/Free-Trade-Doesnt-...578079674/

See "The Painless Stagnation of Japan". People get all bent of shape that their numbers aren't growing, but the average Japanese lives pretty well in a safe and orderly society. The guys getting hurt are the speculators that can't game the system.

Quote: (08-02-2014 07:43 AM)kosko Wrote:  

Immigration is a herring. America would be completely dead with out it. Nobody realize that Americana can't even barley re-populate itself. Nobody also realizes that for Tony the random Mexican peasant, your also getting Engineers, nurses, and other professionals coming trough the gate whom pay big money to dance through hoops to gain citizenship.

Except nobody is complaining about the LEGAL immigration described above, they're complaining about the people that DON'T make the cut, don't have the skills, don't dance the hoops, or pay the big money.

People oftentimes forget that economics are largely theoretical, i.e. the most brilliant left-wing economist could make compelling arguments on par with the most brilliant right-wing economist.

On paper, it's all theory that gets argued forever. Both sides so convinced they know the secret to balancing to world's economy.

Quote: (08-03-2014 03:43 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

Quote: (08-02-2014 07:43 AM)kosko Wrote:  

Immigration is a herring. America would be completely dead with out it. Nobody realize that Americana can't even barley re-populate itself. Nobody also realizes that for Tony the random Mexican peasant, your also getting Engineers, nurses, and other professionals coming trough the gate whom pay big money to dance through hoops to gain citizenship.

Except nobody is complaining about the LEGAL immigration described above, they're complaining about the people that DON'T make the cut, don't have the skills, don't dance the hoops, or pay the big money.

Both ends are "taking jobs" are they not?

I don't think the average American can't compete for scab wages or professional wages that bob camps whom migrate take up. A lot of numbers on jobs but show me the quality of the jobs not the quantity. Real unemployment is at 20% but 60% of the economy is useless serve work and another 10-15% (minus contractors) is useless government paper busy work. The "Average" American is no better then a mule. We shouldn't think RVFs views correlate to the general stock of Americans whom might also share the same views. RVF is a minority of good and smart men, I argue the average American is so far down and just feels to entitled to sweat for a wage or is to dumb to compete with migrant professionals whom have to get double credentials most of the time just to work here. This post is also a response to @Zelcorpion also.

Maybe since I'm up here in Canada I get a better outside view of it. Plus I am not in the dark to see immigration for what it is. Canada does not have the illegal issue but we are quick to move the goal posts on immigration policy to suit are needs. It's 100% political here and rigged to suit our labour needs. We import professionals to serve us coffee but whom quickly fill gaps once our established base of workers retire or fade away. The average Canadian is protected to do useless busy work that is above pouring coffee and driving cabs.