Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 02-13-2012, 04:52 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep View Post
Well, I think it is a very relevant part of the issue. That "distraction" is the part that people often overlook thus resulting in (basically) uninformed poor decisions.
All we're talking about is the concept of paying money to borrow money, and the effects of inflation. We're talking about the cost of buying time, and whether inflation affects that or not. Whether that time is purchased with simple interest or compounding interest doesn't alter the basic concepts.

Quote:



Yes, I acknowledge the "benefits". Also, I say it results in unhealthy financial decision making by MANY. Basically, I somewhat understand how the "game" works but I also know MANY are very bad at it and we all pay the price.
It also results in very profitable financial decisions by MANY. I would say MOST. The vast majority of debt is "good". Yes, some people - a lot of people - get themselves into trouble with debt, especially credit card debt. But debt itself isn't a bad thing, and most use it responsibly.

Evidence? The fact that investors are willing to lend at such low interest rates. At 3% interest, one failed loan can wipe out entirely the earnings of 33 equivalent good loans.
Quote:


Because it isn't my primary vehicle.
So what? Your second vehicle shouldn't be just as efficient as your first? The fact is that you decided that your Jeep was a good "investment" - you spent money on it, money that you could have saved, spent on something else, put towards the debt you said you had, lent to someone at interest, etc.
Quote:

Really, the summary of it all (to me) is that most people don't understand how it works. When that is happening several things go on:

1. Gov't takes advantage and uses this "steath tax" (you cannot deny that because most probably don't realize it.).

2. People make poor decisions and get themselves into financial trouble.

3. People claim "they were taken advantage of."

4. Blame is placed incorrectly. (again, used by the gov't as political tool)

5. "We" are made to be sympethetic to those who were "taken advantage of" and we all pay. (again, used by gov't officials to buy votes)

And the circle continues. To put it plainly, it is used to manipulate the countries finances. Yeah, I am aware it can be played to your advantage. Careful though, if you are too successful at it then you are the "evil" 1%!
I don't follow your line of reasoning. Can we go through it step-by-step?

Let's start at your first point: What is this "stealth tax" you're referring to? You referred to inflation as a stealth tax before, but as we've already shown, inflation *helps* borrowers. The greater the inflation, the less real-value that a borrower loses as he pays off his loan.

If you could explain that point a little more, I think we could get somewhere.
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 08:12 PM  
MRB
Senior Member
 
MRB's Avatar

Sacramento, California
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 389 | Kudos: +56
Getting back to the OP; I'd like to know how being conservitive or liberal has anything to do with an individuals IQ? I dont care who wrote it or who backs it, I think this article is a crock of shat.

Theres EQ and ignorance also. EQ can't be helped much like IQ, however, ignorance can be cured.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 08:31 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRB
Getting back to the OP; I'd like to know how being conservitive or liberal has anything to do with an individuals IQ? I dont care who wrote it or who backs it, I think this article is a crock of shat.

Theres EQ and ignorance also. EQ can't be helped much like IQ, however, ignorance can be cured.
Well, the greater a person's intelligence, the more information they are capable of integrating into their worldview, and the more information one has, the more accurate their conclusions will be. A person who is incapable or unwilling to integrate new data will gravitate to what they already know, regardless of its validity in light of new evidence. Intelligence doesn't guarantee liberalism; conservatism doesn't guarantee low IQ. But the article - and numerous other studies - indicate a statistically significant correlation between IQ and political ideology.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 06:00 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
Well, the greater a person's intelligence, the more information they are capable of integrating into their worldview, and the more information one has, the more accurate their conclusions will be. A person who is incapable or unwilling to integrate new data will gravitate to what they already know, regardless of its validity in light of new evidence. Intelligence doesn't guarantee liberalism; conservatism doesn't guarantee low IQ. But the article - and numerous other studies - indicate a statistically significant correlation between IQ and political ideology.
I also believe that article has to be a crock. Bunch of garbage. Whatever.

One thing I do notice though is that many of your mainstream liberals seem to be in the business of intangible goods. I have to wonder if that is why they generally hate businesspeople and the selling of "things" for a profit. By intangible I am referring to things such as entertainment, education, and some services. (Of course, this is a generalization...)
__________________
"A society that puts equality ... ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom."

--Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 06:02 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
Let's start at your first point: What is this "stealth tax" you're referring to? You referred to inflation as a stealth tax before, but as we've already shown, inflation *helps* borrowers. The greater the inflation, the less real-value that a borrower loses as he pays off his loan.

If you could explain that point a little more, I think we could get somewhere.
The government removing your money (aka spending power) for their benefit=Tax.
Most people not realizing it=stealth.

Stealth tax. What's not to understand?
__________________
"A society that puts equality ... ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom."

--Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 07:55 AM  
Senior Member
 
Sideways's Avatar

Houston, Texas
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 980 | Kudos: +33
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep

I also believe that article has to be a crock. Bunch of garbage. Whatever.

One thing I do notice though is that many of your mainstream liberals seem to be in the business of intangible goods. I have to wonder if that is why they generally hate businesspeople and the selling of "things" for a profit. By intangible I am referring to things such as entertainment, education, and some services. (Of course, this is a generalization...)
If you mean that "mainstream" conservatives are more materialistic I would agree. Just a generalization of course.
__________________
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal. Never forget that everything the Founding Fathers did was not." Martin Luther King, Jr.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 08:54 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep

I also believe that article has to be a crock. Bunch of garbage. Whatever.
I think that pretty much sums it up. The OP is a rationally-stated theory, supported (not proven, of course) with statistical evidence, to which you have countered with an unsupported statement of belief.
Quote:
One thing I do notice though is that many of your mainstream liberals seem to be in the business of intangible goods. I have to wonder if that is why they generally hate businesspeople and the selling of "things" for a profit. By intangible I am referring to things such as entertainment, education, and some services. (Of course, this is a generalization...)
Education is not intangible. It provides a clear, quantifiable benefit to the "buyer". Nor are services. The benefit of entertainment isn't readily quantifiable. Furthermore, you haven't demonstrated that mainstream liberals hate businesspeople. I think your generalization is faulty, but I'd be willing to listen if you care to support it.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 09:31 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep

The government removing your money (aka spending power) for their benefit=Tax.
Most people not realizing it=stealth.

Stealth tax. What's not to understand?
Well, the "stealth" part. It is well understood. The government and private organizations regularly quantify it and regularly publish in-depth statistics on it.

Second, the "tax" part. Using your definition, I can show that inflation increases the spending power of anyone who takes on a monetary debt. Anyone can borrow dollars today and fulfill that obligation with less-valuable dollars tomorrow. Since inflation provides a benefit, it can hardly be called a tax.

Third, back to the "stealth" part, I would remind you that you have commented on the prevalence of consumer debt in this country. A hell of a lot of people benefit a hell of a lot from this; it is absurd to think they don't know about it.

With all that in mind, describing inflation as a "stealth tax" is patently absurd. It is inflation. It affects your purchasing power only as much as you let it.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 09:54 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
Well, the "stealth" part. It is well understood. The government and private organizations regularly quantify it and regularly publish in-depth statistics on it. .
That is true. Many things are printed and reported on but that doesn't mean a majority of people are aware. Apparently if most people think that "prices are rising" that is technically incorrect because it is the value of the dollar is decreasing. Businesses aren't necessarily just "raising the cost" of goods because they feel like it..

Quote:
Second, the "tax" part. Using your definition, I can show that inflation increases the spending power of anyone who takes on a monetary debt. Anyone can borrow dollars today and fulfill that obligation with less-valuable dollars tomorrow. Since inflation provides a benefit, it can hardly be called a tax..
Okay, so "increasing cost" may help some... What's your point? Like I said, it is possible to benefit from it. It is STILL a tool used by the government to manipulate the financial system.


I am going to add this... If I look at a rate of pay and let's just say (for argument's sake) that someones pay was $20 an hour in and by 2011 they were making $25 dollars an hour..Most people will think "oh, that's not too bad,," ...When in fact from a spending power standpoint I am making "about 45 cents less" than I was 10 years ago.

Quote:
Third, back to the "stealth" part, I would remind you that you have commented on the prevalence of consumer debt in this country. A hell of a lot of people benefit a hell of a lot from this; it is absurd to think they don't know about it. .
Again, I am aware that many people cen benefit from it. (Those people are generally deemed "evil" for takiing advantage of others)

Quote:
With all that in mind, describing inflation as a "stealth tax" is patently absurd. It is inflation. It affects your purchasing power only as much as you let it.
Yeah, tell my paycheck that. My rate of pay may stay the same while that pay doesn't purchase as much. Again, MANY people don't really realize this. They simply think the cost of goods is increasing. Most don't look beyond that so they misplace the blame!

I feel we are just running in circles with this.... We apparently have two completely different beliefs on this.


I am going to add this... If I look at a rate of pay and let's just say (for argument's sake) that someones pay was $20 an hour in 2001and by 2011 they were making $25 dollars an hour..Most people will think "oh, that's not too terribly bad,," ...When in fact from a spending power standpoint they are making "about 45 cents less" than they were 10 years ago.
__________________
"A society that puts equality ... ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom."

--Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 11:37 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep View Post
That is true. Many things are printed and reported on but that doesn't mean a majority of people are aware. Apparently if most people think that "prices are rising" that is technically incorrect because it is the value of the dollar is decreasing. Businesses aren't necessarily just "raising the cost" of goods because they feel like it..


Okay, so "increasing cost" may help some... What's your point? Like I said, it is possible to benefit from it. It is STILL a tool used by the government to manipulate the financial system.
I take it from your comments that you consider this a bad thing, and perhaps it is. But at the very least, I would argue it is the lesser of two evils. Under the Bretton Woods gold standard, every *other* government was able to manipulate our economy by adjusting the value of their own currency, and they did so to our detriment. Switching to fiat currency gave us - the government of the people - the ability to manipulate our own economy as well as overseas economies.

Quote:



I am going to add this... If I look at a rate of pay and let's just say (for argument's sake) that someones pay was $20 an hour in and by 2011 they were making $25 dollars an hour..Most people will think "oh, that's not too bad,," ...When in fact from a spending power standpoint I am making "about 45 cents less" than I was 10 years ago.
So what?

If inflation were the only factor, your pay would increase along with your costs. Inflation is *not* the only factor. If you were a buggy-whip manufacturer, your loss of income isn't due to inflation, but because your products and services became obsolete with widespread adoption of the automobile.

Quote:

Again, I am aware that many people cen benefit from it. (Those people are generally deemed "evil" for takiing advantage of others)
Then it's not a stealth tax. It's a market condition.
Furthermore, inflation benefits everyone who has a loan, yourself included. The dollars you use to make your mortgage payment today are worth less than the dollars you used to pay it a year ago. Evil? No. It's just the nature of the market.
Quote:

Yeah, tell my paycheck that. My rate of pay may stay the same while that pay doesn't purchase as much. Again, MANY people don't really realize this. They simply think the cost of goods is increasing. Most don't look beyond that so they misplace the blame!

I feel we are just running in circles with this.... We apparently have two completely different beliefs on this.
Sure, we have two different beliefs on it, but we also have two different theories. I've poked giant holes in the theories you've presented. I've used the evidence you've presented to do it. That doesn't mean you're wrong, per se, but it does mean that you should reevaluate your position, study it carefully, and abandon those things that no longer make sense. Perhaps your theory wasn't fully correct, perhaps you've misinterpreted the effects of the evidence you've presented. It is possible that my arguments are faulty, but you haven't shown this - you've stated you disbelieve me, but you haven't demonstrated and justified that disbelief.
Quote:
I am going to add this... If I look at a rate of pay and let's just say (for argument's sake) that someones pay was $20 an hour in 2001and by 2011 they were making $25 dollars an hour..Most people will think "oh, that's not too terribly bad,," ...When in fact from a spending power standpoint they are making "about 45 cents less" than they were 10 years ago.
There's a whole lot of "if" coming off that scenario. If they were making $20/hour in 2001 and $15/hour in 2011, what does that indicate about inflation? If they were making $20/hour in 2001 and $200/hr in 2011, what does that indicate about inflation?
Nothing. Not a damn thing whatsoever.

Inflation theory alone suggests that the same job would have the same real-value in 2001 or 2011. If there is a difference in real value, I would point at market forces, not inflation.
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.