The discussion revolves around Chalmers Johnson's perspectives on American foreign policy and domestic issues, particularly focusing on themes of economic decline, military spending, and taxation. Participants engage with Johnson's ideas as presented in his writings, including "Blowback," and explore the implications of U.S. actions both domestically and internationally.
Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement, with no consensus on Johnson's critiques or the broader implications of U.S. economic and foreign policies. Multiple competing views remain on taxation, media coverage, and the state of the economy.
Participants reference various sources and statistics to support their claims, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the interpretations of economic data and the implications of U.S. policies. The discussion reflects differing perspectives on the effectiveness and morality of current economic strategies.
You need to explain what your thoughts are and what you want to discuss.wolram said:
falc39 said:I just read his newer edition of Blowback, loved it!
russ_watters said:Absolute drivel.
russ_watters said:Absolute drivel.
Just one example: the 'tax cuts for the rich' thing democrats like to throw around. Here's the actual fact: the tax rate cuts are pretty even across the board, but the increase in basic deductions means that the disproportionate share of the cuts goes to lower income people: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010604-128131,00.html
http://www.cnbc.com/id/21553857/Warren: ...well, the taxation system has tilted toward the rich and away from the middle class in the last ten years is-- is dramatic, and I don't think it's appreciated. And I think it should be addressed.
Tom: You've talked about in your office, for example, you pay a much lower tax rate with all of your wealth than, say, a receptionist does.
Warren: That's exactly right, Tom. And I-- I think the only way to do it is with specifics, and-- and - and in our office, 15 people cooperated in a survey out of 18. I didn't make anybody do it. And my total taxes paid-- payroll taxes plus income tax-- and the payroll tax is an income tax. It's based on income.
WALL Street banks are among the 14 corporations under investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for possible crimes relating to the sub-prime mortgage crisis.
The FBI will not identify the companies being investigated, but said the probe was industry-wide and included investment banks, developers, sub-prime lenders and companies that securitized loans.
The sub-prime crisis has already cost some of the biggest banks in the US in excess of $US130 billion ($147 billion) in bad debt. Sub-prime loans were typically made to people with bad credit or low income who would typically not have qualified for traditional loans.
Do you equate the rebate plan with 'doing' something effective?edward said:In the meantime Bush and the Congress became concerned enough to actually do something and almost immediately they came up with the rebate plan.
Evo said:You need to explain what your thoughts are and what you want to discuss.
mheslep said:Do you equate the rebate plan with 'doing' something effective?
Chairman Greenspan publicly commented on the debt recently in a public conversation w/ the President. The President responded essentially as is posted above here and Greenspan stated yes that's correct as far as it goes, but he was worried about all of the future entitlement spending for which the government is already committed (e.g. prescription drug benefit, social security, ...) that very much will explode the debt as percentage of GDP.Reverie said:1.)
“There are three broad aspects to our debt crisis.”
America is not in a debt crisis. Public debt as a percentage of GDP indicates how heavily a country is indebted in comparison to its ability to pay as measured by its GDP. Here is a Wikipedia article with the computed ratios for many countries. The higher the ranking, the bigger the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
Chalmers is talking about $ totals and most of that would likely be found in very expensive US military aircraft sales, for which the US completely dominates the world. If you therefore look to sales to S. Arabia, Pakistan, Isreal, etc which fly US F-16s, 15's the US must be at the top of the export lists. This is a policy holdover from cold war proxy fights and should be greatly reduced IMO.2.)
“The United States has become the largest single salesman of arms and munitions to other nations on Earth.”
Itemized weapons sales to Iraq by country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_s...or_conventional_arms_sales_to_Iraq_by_country
Correct.3.)
“The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since World War II.”
America spends 1% of GDP on the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. American expenditure during the Korean War was 13% of her GDP. During WWII it was almost 50% of her GDP.
Dunno, maybe he suffered brain damage from smoking too much pot?fourier jr said:He used to be such a good employee of the American Gestapo, and now he's a well-known critic of The Empire. What do you think went wrong?
? The link provides the exact rate adjustments and other changes in the tax law.Ivan Seeking said:Your link does not establish the truth of your claim.
Your post does not address my claim at all. Perhaps you should reread it... Or maybe I should simply my point for you:According to Warren Buffet:
Quote:
Warren: ...well, the taxation system has tilted toward the rich and away from the middle class in the last ten years is-- is dramatic, and I don't think it's appreciated. And I think it should be addressed.
Tom: You've talked about in your office, for example, you pay a much lower tax rate with all of your wealth than, say, a receptionist does.
Warren: That's exactly right, Tom. And I-- I think the only way to do it is with specifics, and-- and - and in our office, 15 people cooperated in a survey out of 18. I didn't make anybody do it. And my total taxes paid-- payroll taxes plus income tax-- and the payroll tax is an income tax. It's based on income.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/21553857/
Anyone who has completed anything more complicated than a 1040 EZ knows that one has to consider the effective tax rate after deductions. Of course Buffet is probably just another looney liberal.