Daily Economy Thread

[Economy 52,844]

How will Greece leaving the Eurozone affect other Eurozone countries? And what will happen to stocks all around the EU?

My parents want to put all money on a bank bc they think that stocks are overpriced atm in Europe and are peaking. They won't invest in oil or things like that because it's not environmentally responsible. I wonder if they should indeed put all money on banks so it's safer...

the EU started QE tho which favors stocks by lowering fixed income yields and forcig investors to stocks and helps earnings particularly of export companies

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

the EU started QE tho which favors stocks by lowering fixed income yields and forcig investors to stocks and helps earnings particularly of export companies

actually its even better if they give all their money to woolfsmck so he can let his bank account get biggger... 8-)

[Economy 52,844]

actually its even better if they give all their money to woolfsmck so he can let his bank account get biggger... 8-)

hey i wanna retire too

Im 21 so i still got 44 years till i turn 65. And since they are raising old age security payments to 67 and retirement payments may also be raised at some point i might have to wait even longer :noparty:

[TiphEret 1,320]

we were warned that Obama Care HIGHLY discourages full-time hiring because full time workers become a more expensive liability and so companies hire part-time if they can

Time and time again many experts warn that socialist ideas that may be meant to help the average person tends to backfire and have the opposite effect

The middle class benefits from job creation and a strong productive economy. The middle class is the one that suffers most when there is a lack of jobs and economic problems

We need low taxes to encourage business investment, not over-regulate everything making business and entreprenership a hassle etc

Ppl dont listen. If socialism really worked then Europe should be doing fantastic, and Capitalist Switzerland, Hong Kong terribly

The US did MUCH better economically in the past when it was a free market and now it has deteriorated in recent decades as ppl expect more entitlements and the US Government has one of the highest Corporate taxes in the world

I dont know why ppl just dont get it... Its not that complicated

 

I don't think you can socialism as the issue alone, for example in Denmark it works fine and the welfare system has high standard and the taxes are pretty high. Plus isn't because of the US crisis that Europe got in recession in the first place? An uncontrolled capitalist economy that went berserk because nobody was checking what was going on? I am really not an expert on that but that's what I understood...

[Economy 52,844]

I don't think you can socialism as the issue alone, for example in Denmark it works fine and the welfare system has high standard and the taxes are pretty high. Plus isn't because of the US crisis that Europe got in recession in the first place? An uncontrolled capitalist economy that went berserk because nobody was checking what was going on? I am really not an expert on that but that's what I understood...

you cant blame Europes problems on the US

My Country Canada is far more dependant on the US than any European Country. 75% of our exports go to the US... Yet we survived the recession more stable than most of the Developed world

The US was a trigger... But Europe had serious imbalances themselves. If it wasnt the US triggering the downturn it would of been something else.

If the US had all the problems and Europe nothing, you wouldnt have Europe struggling even more with a much longer lasting stagnation than the US themselves.

Plus ppl say it was "lack of regulation" but if anything Government meddling made the speculation worse. The Government started that dumb program with Fanie Mae and Freddie mac to ensure mortages from ppl that normally could never get mortgages

The Government encouraged bad mortgages the private sector alone never would of taken those risks :shrug:

[TiphEret 1,320]

you cant blame Europes problems on the US

My Country Canada is far more dependant on the US than any European Country. 75% of our exports go to the US... Yet we survived the recession more stable than most of the Developed world

The US was a trigger... But Europe had serious imbalances themselves. If it wasnt the US triggering the downturn it would of been something else.

If the US had all the problems and Europe nothing, you wouldnt have Europe struggling even more with a much longer lasting stagnation than the US themselves.

Plus ppl say it was "lack of regulation" but if anything Government meddling made the speculation worse. The Government started that dumb program with Fanie Mae and Freddie mac to ensure mortages from ppl that normally could never get mortgages

The Government encouraged bad mortgages the private sector alone never would of taken those risks

 

I see your point about the US, thanks for explaining as I said I don't know that much, however I think the situation in Europe isn't that black or white and I don't see how socialism could be the issue there, it works in some places and it doesn't work in others. The euro definitely had a huge impact, but at the end the crisis brings something new, I am not speaking of Greece because I am more like "wait and see" and I think it's a bit surrealistic but for example my friends in Spain say that people are doing things locally, exploring new ways of doing business and working so maybe capitalist isn't the only way to go, at least the way we do it now...

[Luc 4,776]

you cant blame Europes problems on the US

My Country Canada is far more dependant on the US than any European Country. 75% of our exports go to the US... Yet we survived the recession more stable than most of the Developed world

The US was a trigger... But Europe had serious imbalances themselves. If it wasnt the US triggering the downturn it would of been something else.

If the US had all the problems and Europe nothing, you wouldnt have Europe struggling even more with a much longer lasting stagnation than the US themselves.

Plus ppl say it was "lack of regulation" but if anything Government meddling made the speculation worse. The Government started that dumb program with Fanie Mae and Freddie mac to ensure mortages from ppl that normally could never get mortgages

The Government encouraged bad mortgages the private sector alone never would of taken those risks

I don't think you can blame everything on socialism. Socialism has proven to work well if it's not overdone. Scandinavia and the Netherlands are good examples.

 

I do however think that socialism in its current form doesn't work. If one person has 1 billion euro and earns 1000€, and the other has €1000 and earns €50000, the former is obviously richer, but a socialist will still prefer taxing the latter because of the income rather than the total amount of money somebody has. That's what should be more equally divided, so taxes can be lowered and people will stay motivated to get a good job and to finish university.

 

But I must say that many ideas that socialists often have indeed don't work. You shouldn't raise taxes all the time, you shouldn't put more and more rules all the time, you should invest in infrastructure, innovation and education rather than healthcare and pensions, you should privatize and make the government spending lower so taxes can be lowered, you should not invest in the economy when you have a debt of 180%..

[Economy 52,844]

I see your point about the US, thanks for explaining as I said I don't know that much, however I think the situation in Europe isn't that black or white and I don't see how socialism could be the issue there, it works in some places and it doesn't work in others. The euro definitely had a huge impact, but at the end the crisis brings something new, I am not speaking of Greece because I am more like "wait and see" and I think it's a bit surrealistic but for example my friends in Spain say that people are doing things locally, exploring new ways of doing business and working so maybe capitalist isn't the only way to go, at least the way we do it now...

yeah its not black or white. Other factors that have nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism influence an economy also

But like LUC said above. Scandinavian Countries and a few others have made socialism work and i was actually thinking that in my mind. But if u think about it, the few Countries that have made it work are small Countries...

I see socialism as a more complicated strategy. It CAN work but if your gonna regulate more and be more involved in what businesses do, and if yur gonna tax more and decide more where resources should be allocated, you need to be very competent. Socialism can be very easy to screw up if you dont know hat yur doing or if Governments start fighting with the opposition and plans get blocked etc and thats a bigger issue when a Government is more controlling

But yeah with the US... I was actually surprised. It was an unusually socialist move on the part of the Republicans when they decided to use tax payers money to ensure mortgag loans from "people of modest means"

I think the Private Sector never would of made as many crazy risky loans of the Government didnt encourage it. And the housing bubble wouldnt have gotten as big

Also theres the Central Bank (Federal Reserve in the US)... They kept rates too low for too long after the 2001 recession that was caused by the ".com bubble" and the 9/11 incident.

Once recovery began they were very slow to raise rates and let the economy over-heat. By 2004 the economy was booming big time and too fast and tones of bubbles being created.

So the greedy unregulated private sector in the US was only a portion of the problem. The little bit the Government got involved in was only making it worse cause they did such stupid things.

Ppl often Forget what the Government did and like to put all the blame on the banks :shrug:

[Economy 52,844]

I don't think you can blame everything on socialism. Socialism has proven to work well if it's not overdone. Scandinavia and the Netherlands are good examples.

I do however think that socialism in its current form doesn't work. If one person has 1 billion euro and earns 1000€, and the other has €1000 and earns €50000, the former is obviously richer, but a socialist will still prefer taxing the latter because of the income rather than the total amount of money somebody has. That's what should be more equally divided, so taxes can be lowered and people will stay motivated to get a good job and to finish university.

But I must say that many ideas that socialists often have indeed don't work. You shouldn't raise taxes all the time, you shouldn't put more and more rules all the time, you should invest in infrastructure, innovation and education rather than healthcare and pensions, you should privatize and make the government spending lower so taxes can be lowered, you should not invest in the economy when you have a debt of 180%..

i still dont agree with that idea of yours on the net worth tax...

Cuz #1 some assets are hard to put an exact value like a home for instance. U can only estimate market value. What about items of value? Are u gonna send ramdom audits to ppls private homes and check the whole house to find valuables?

Then theres the issue of savings. Ur forcing ppl not to save....

If someone earns $10,000 after taxes and chooses to put it away... Even if the tax is only 1%, after 10 years they will be taxed a whole 10% and they loose $1,000

What about RSPs? Do ppl have to pax tax on that? Its a net worth thing too. What gets exmptions?

I think a tax like what ur proposing would be much too complicated to ever be effective

If u already tax ppls incomes, theres no need tax them again once they buy something (or save for that matter)

[Luc 4,776]

i still dont agree with that idea of yours on the net worth tax...

Cuz #1 some assets are hard to put an exact value like a home for instance. U can only estimate market value. What about items of value? Are u gonna send ramdom audits to ppls private homes and check the whole house to find valuables?

Then theres the issue of savings. Ur forcing ppl not to save....

If someone earns $10,000 after taxes and chooses to put it away... Even if the tax is only 1%, after 10 years they will be taxed a whole 10% and they loose $1,000

What about RSPs? Do ppl have to pax tax on that? Its a net worth thing too. What gets exmptions?

I think a tax like what ur proposing would be much too complicated to ever be effective

If u already tax ppls incomes, theres no need tax them again once they buy something (or save for that matter)

But it is the best way to strive for equality

 

There's of course other ways to implement something alike, for example a way higher heritage tax.

 

My parents had a really low heritage tax because all stocks were so low in 2008, and my grandpa died at the worst point of the crisis

[Economy 52,844]

But it is the best way to strive for equality

 

There's of course other ways to implement something alike, for example a way higher heritage tax.

 

My parents had a really low heritage tax because all stocks were so low in 2008, and my grandpa died at the worst point of the crisis

i disagree... it would be extremely unfair

 

because it would be complicated and some things hard to calculate some people would pay more than other that do not deserve it

 

ud also be taxing ppl who choose to put away more than wreck-less spenders even if they earn the same.

 

If i eanr $50,000 a year i should not have to pay more taxes than my friend that makes the same amount just because  chose to be responsible and save up for my future and build up my net worth while he spends it all and has no plan

 

again, with income taxes if u do it effectively u can already tax higher income earners more (and for the record im not totally against taxing high income earners a bit more as long as its within reason)... what ur proposing is too complicated and in many cases will be completely unfair because its difficult to be fair with a tax system like that

[Luc 4,776]

i disagree... it would be extremely unfair

 

because it would be complicated and some things hard to calculate some people would pay more than other that do not deserve it

 

ud also be taxing ppl who choose to put away more than wreck-less spenders even if they earn the same.

 

If i eanr $50,000 a year i should not have to pay more taxes than my friend that makes the same amount just because  chose to be responsible and save up for my future and build up my net worth while he spends it all and has no plan

 

again, with income taxes if u do it effectively u can already tax higher income earners more (and for the record im not totally against taxing high income earners a bit more as long as its within reason)... what ur proposing is too complicated and in many cases will be completely unfair because its difficult to be fair with a tax system like that

But how are we going to prevent the people with over a million dollars from getting even richer? Perhaps a tax on net worth is too hard, but a 100% tax for all heritage money above a certain amount should redistribute things better in the world and make people earn their own money instead of living off of their parents'

 

There just needs to be a way to generate enough taxes while still having a bit of socialism and at the same time not demotivate people from getting a better job and also not scaring away business or making the purchasing power much lower.

 

I think highering taxes for the rich is useless, because it demotivates people so much.

 

 

Anyways, too liberal is never okay. It's good if people and businesses get to decide more on what they do, but banks on the other hand should be checked better, have a bigger buffer, have a less fluctuant interest rate for mortgages, etc. to prevent bubbles. I'm scared the QE action of the ECB will cause bubbles in Europe.

[Luc 4,776]

Greece might exit the Eurozone, but Denmark might enter to avoid a recession like in Switzerland. Good tactic to make strong, small countries join tbh: devalue the euro so it's unsustainable for other countries.

[Economy 52,844]

Greece might exit the Eurozone, but Denmark might enter to avoid a recession like in Switzerland. Good tactic to make strong, small countries join tbh: devalue the euro so it's unsustainable for other countries.

i cant at Countries trying to debase a currency as a way to get more exports

Everyone is getting lazy to build competitiveness and relying on their Central Banks to weaken their currencies...

Well when everyone tries to do that u cancel out most of the devaluation against other currencies exept for the difference in which ur aboe to devalue it more than another Nation

Japan wants to devalue the yen, the Swiss dont like their strong currency, the EU doesnt, America doesnt omg

U know, a strong currency is actually good if ur economy is competitive enough to handle it cause u dont loose your productive part of the economy while also getting more purchasing power

Countries need to get their priorities straight :MANiCURE:

[Economy 52,844]

But how are we going to prevent the people with over a million dollars from getting even richer? Perhaps a tax on net worth is too hard, but a 100% tax for all heritage money above a certain amount should redistribute things better in the world and make people earn their own money instead of living off of their parents'

There just needs to be a way to generate enough taxes while still having a bit of socialism and at the same time not demotivate people from getting a better job and also not scaring away business or making the purchasing power much lower.

I think highering taxes for the rich is useless, because it demotivates people so much.

Anyways, too liberal is never okay. It's good if people and businesses get to decide more on what they do, but banks on the other hand should be checked better, have a bigger buffer, have a less fluctuant interest rate for mortgages, etc. to prevent bubbles. I'm scared the QE action of the ECB will cause bubbles in Europe.

100%????? Ppl with over a certain amount would simply divide their enheritance among other ppl too then so the Government didnt take it. U cant just confiscate things ppl already have. A net worth tax or 100% enheritance tax is basically what that is.

I think if Countries dont go into too much debt and as a result dont have to soend much on interest, are efficient with how they spend the money, really u dont need that muh revenue

And if u build a strong economy, u dont need to spend as much on entitlements to begin with...

Also i dont like over-regulation... But if u regulate a bit u coukd regulate stuff like tougher rules like no stock manipulation. For instance stock buy backs used to not be done cause companies were afraid of being fined...

So the only way to grow a stock was to grow earnings so they would have to actually invest more in expanding business. Now we have too much resources being spent on wallstreet and it doesnt make it to the main economy

Like i like low taxes and low regulation to encourage investment and strong economy... And what u have to do is be smart about the little regulation u do put in and what ur targeting... And be smart on what u spend ur tax $$$$$ on

Theres too much inneficiencies. Our current system discourages business investment, doesnt use tax money efficiently in many ways, and regulates uninportant things and fails to regulate what does need to be regulated

Its a giant mess, no wonder we cant get out of stagnation.

Lastly we need to learn to make sacrafices when necessairy. For instance, were living longer, and birth rates are at an all-time low. Current retirement ages are not realistic or sustainable. We can not have more and more ppl leaving the workforce and not producing while using up services.

Retirement age at 65 (lower in some countries) is outdated and ppl need to accept that. Actually an aging population is one if the biggest issues mentioned by experts :shrug: