Is This Guy For Real?

[yadayada]

What you guys are also forgetting is that we actually had sort of a third world war. The cold war. There was a reason no side attacked the other side, and everyone was bluffing. Here is how a war would go now:

 

Hey 50k tanks and 400k troops marching towards our country! *throws nuke* Aaaaaand its gone.

 

Hey A giant fleet of chinese ships sailing to our nation! *throws nuke* Aaaaaand its gone.

 

It seems superiority mostly means having that airplane or submarine that will be able to sneak a nuke in. And then having enough back ups in case the enemy tries to sabotage them. There isnt really a shortage of nukes laying around.

[wachtwoord]

I'm going to focus on another aspect totally ignored. The wealth tax.

 

He is calling for the "war cycle" to start ramping up soon, and supposedly a "source" in Washington is saying the USA is going to impose a 10% wealth tax in order to help pay off debt. Crazy stuff.

 

See: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304355104579232480552517224?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

 

Between ObamaCare, Iran and last quarter's uptick in U.S. economic growth, taxpayers these days may be distracted from several dangers to come. But households from the United States to Europe and Japan may soon face fiscal shocks worse than any market crash.

...

Of course these measures won't return the world's top economies to sustainable levels of debt. That could be achieved only through significant economic growth (the good way) or, as the IMF puts it, "by repudiating public debt or inflating it away" (the bad way). In October the IMF floated a bold idea that didn't get the attention it deserved: lowering sovereign debt levels through a one-off tax on private wealth.

 

As applied to the euro zone, the IMF claims that a 10% levy on households' positive net worth would bring public debt levels back to pre-financial crisis levels. Such a tax sounds crazy, but recall what happened in euro-zone country Cyprus this year: Holders of bank accounts larger than 100,000 euros had to incur losses of up to 100% on their savings above that threshold, in order to "bail-in" the bankrupt Mediterranean state. Japanese households, sitting on one of the world's largest pools of savings, have particular reason to worry about their assets: At 240% of GDP, their country's public debt ratio is more than twice that of Cyprus when it defaulted.

 

From New York to London, Paris and beyond, powerful economic players are deciding that with an ever-deteriorating global fiscal outlook, conventional levels and methods of taxation will no longer suffice. That makes weapons of mass wealth destruction—such as the IMF's one-off capital levy, Cyprus's bank deposit confiscation, or outright sovereign defaults—likelier by the day.

 

I think the people in charge are probably retarded enough to actually do this (then again they might not). I'm interested to hear other viewpoints :)

[Cardboard]

"Fortunately, Chinese are not led by populists the way the US is, and I believe their leadership is more rational. "

 

So a politburo led by a few individuals, with many corrupt, can be more rational than a group of people that debates all day long and all elected by its people?

 

I guess you must have the same logic with the Iranian leadership where elections are fake. Where is the opposition that says we will remove the Supreme leader? There is none. To claim that this is a democracy is foolish.

 

History has shown that people who grab power via coup, brutality or whatever means needed are the ones who care very little about their own people and often initiate attacks and try to wipeout other countries and populations. They will go for "total war" concepts and sacrifice them all if necessary.

 

While I am not American, they have never done such thing. Every time they entered a conflict, it was about regime change, meaning democracy, meaning a better future for their enemy's people. They also always try to minimize their losses and their enemies losses. Why do you think that they launched two atomic bombs against Japan? It was to make them capitulate quickly and to stop fighting. If the U.S. had been more like the other regimes that you admire, they would have invaded Japan and wiped it out.

 

There is also a very sound reason why the U.S. is protecting Japan: because the Allies during WWII made it a democracy and forced it to not re-arm. It is undeniable that the Japanese people benefited tremendously from being a democracy. One of the most advanced and rich country in the world and a giant leap in its standard of living. It is the only system that works and that has worked throughout history. If the U.S. walks away, Japan will re-arm and with the kind of racial hatred that still exists with Korea and China it is not hard to imagine the worst.

 

Regarding the NSA and Europeans anger, it is just a side show. I am totally convinced that they are very happy about the existence of the NSA and the number of attacks that it has prevented. Another one in Wichita yesterday! Even with Merkel being tapped, I see no evidence of corruption or that its power was used for other purposes than defending the American people and its allies including all Europeans against evil doer's.

 

Snowden is a traitor and should be executed. This kind of man is a very dangerous threat to open societies since the NSA and CIA are most likely the only line of defense against enemies that constantly seek ways to destroy a country that allows its people to operate freely. 

 

Cardboard

[Cardboard]

"I think the people in charge are probably retarded enough to actually do this (then again they might not). I'm interested to hear other viewpoints :)"

 

It could well happen but, the situation would have to get much worse than it is now as it is getting better. GDP is growing and deficits have narrowed, at least in the U.S. When another recession hits and if the Fed is still in its current condition: can't lower interest rates, has not tapered, then this tool may get discussed more and gain popular traction. Probably the same for Europe.

 

The rich will also get the point that to avoid civil unrest and to see their portfolio values decline furthermore along with real economics that this would be a small penalty to pay. They are also well ahead since 2007. Europeans rich maybe not as much as their U.S. counterparts but, still doing well.

 

Japan is a different story with a massive debt to GDP ratio and I think that such a wealth tax over there could be more easily accepted even now since its people are all in favor of helping the country when asked.

 

Cardboard

[turar]

I never said I admired them. All I'm saying is that current Chinese government seems more effective and rational than the current US government, which is utterly dysfunctional. It's somewhat similar to the difference between CEOs who have long-term plans and an outlook decades out, as opposed to CEOs who are driven by quarterly results.

 

As for your rosy view of the history of US military aggression over the years, and your desire to execute Snowden, let's just say I disagree, but I don't want to debate any of that here.

[matjone]

Did the "tax" in Cyprus affect stock holdings?  Or just savings and CDs and the like?  How do people envision it going down in the U.S.?

[yadayada]

I like to think of the chinese as sneaky. Not really a nation to make big decisions purely on emotion or pride.

[ERICOPOLY]

Did the "tax" in Cyprus affect stock holdings?  Or just savings and CDs and the like?  How do people envision it going down in the U.S.?

 

I envision them to set low interest rates and high tax rates.

 

So that if you are earning 3% interest rate and paying 40% tax, you only have 1.8% left which doesn't even give you a positive return after inflation.

 

So they are effectively seizing 100% of your real return.

 

I expect them to bring this tax in... immediately.  Oh wait, they've exceeded my expectations!  The 100% tax is already here.

[ERICOPOLY]

Actually, if you could just convince the Chinese to dump their treasury holdings, and convince US taxpayers to purchase them... that would go a long way towards fixing the budget.

 

[matjone]

well with you they are doing a 100% tax on gains as well as a confiscation of a small %  your principal, but this sounds like it will be a straight up confiscation of a good chunk of your wealth.

 

I was pretty surprised at what they did it in Cyprus.  I consider myself pretty damn far from wealthy.  I still have to worry about money, and most of the money I've made has come from long hours doing jobs no one else wants to do.  But I would have been subject to this "tax" on the "wealthy".  At some point this kind of stuff starts to kill your motivation to go to work

 

Did the "tax" in Cyprus affect stock holdings?  Or just savings and CDs and the like?  How do people envision it going down in the U.S.?

 

I envision them to set low interest rates and high tax rates.

 

So that if you are earning 3% interest rate and paying 40% tax, you only have 1.8% left which doesn't even give you a positive return after inflation.

 

So they are effectively seizing 100% of your real return.

 

I expect them to bring this tax in... immediately.  Oh wait, they've exceeded my expectations!  The 100% tax is already here.

[LC]

Fortunately, Chinese are not led by populists the way the US is, and I believe their leadership is more rational.

 

I think Churchill sums it up best:

 

Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

[turar]

That is probably true in the long term. I was specifically talking about the current situation.

[wachtwoord]

Fortunately, Chinese are not led by populists the way the US is, and I believe their leadership is more rational.

 

I think Churchill sums it up best:

 

Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

 

I disagree. Even many dictatorships have outperformed democracy. At least democracy as we define it nowadays with an equal voting right for everyone. I think that's one of the most naive and stupid things ever envisioned by humans.

[yadayada]

isnt singapore sort of a dictator ship? Or like half a democracy where the guy elected stays in power for like 16 years? It works pretty amazing there. I guess if you have the right dictator alot of great things can happen. If you have democracy you will always have mediocracy.

[cr6196]

"Fortunately, Chinese are not led by populists the way the US is, and I believe their leadership is more rational. "

 

So a politburo led by a few individuals, with many corrupt, can be more rational than a group of people that debates all day long and all elected by its people?

 

I guess you must have the same logic with the Iranian leadership where elections are fake. Where is the opposition that says we will remove the Supreme leader? There is none. To claim that this is a democracy is foolish.

 

History has shown that people who grab power via coup, brutality or whatever means needed are the ones who care very little about their own people and often initiate attacks and try to wipeout other countries and populations. They will go for "total war" concepts and sacrifice them all if necessary.

 

While I am not American, they have never done such thing. Every time they entered a conflict, it was about regime change, meaning democracy, meaning a better future for their enemy's people. They also always try to minimize their losses and their enemies losses. Why do you think that they launched two atomic bombs against Japan? It was to make them capitulate quickly and to stop fighting. If the U.S. had been more like the other regimes that you admire, they would have invaded Japan and wiped it out.

 

There is also a very sound reason why the U.S. is protecting Japan: because the Allies during WWII made it a democracy and forced it to not re-arm. It is undeniable that the Japanese people benefited tremendously from being a democracy. One of the most advanced and rich country in the world and a giant leap in its standard of living. It is the only system that works and that has worked throughout history. If the U.S. walks away, Japan will re-arm and with the kind of racial hatred that still exists with Korea and China it is not hard to imagine the worst.

 

Regarding the NSA and Europeans anger, it is just a side show. I am totally convinced that they are very happy about the existence of the NSA and the number of attacks that it has prevented. Another one in Wichita yesterday! Even with Merkel being tapped, I see no evidence of corruption or that its power was used for other purposes than defending the American people and its allies including all Europeans against evil doer's.

 

Snowden is a traitor and should be executed. This kind of man is a very dangerous threat to open societies since the NSA and CIA are most likely the only line of defense against enemies that constantly seek ways to destroy a country that allows its people to operate freely. 

 

Cardboard

 

A few things...first, there isn't any proof (quantitatively) that democracies are more peaceful. There is proof that democracies are less likely to fight each other but that is, in my view, not true either.

 

second, you make a lot of very strange assumptions about dictatorships...one, that they are corrupt. two, that "rationality" is the aim (ironically, rationality is a concept often used to pursue violence against other less "rational" people, read orientalism...this criticism applies as much to the idea that the Chinese are "rational" btw). three, that dictatorships are less subject to popular opinion (one well-known example is Harry Byrd being elected to the Senate in the 1960s on 16% of the electorate, the related point of the US before the 1960s is also legitimate for obvious reasons).

 

third, you criticize dictatorships but consider the extraterritorial authority of NSA/CIA as legitimate...seems odd.

 

fourth, the prototypical example of warlike democracies in international relations is Athens killing all the men, women, and children of Melos in the Pelopennsian War. I don't really say this with a point but you will find that whenever someone argues that democracies are more peaceful, this comes up.

 

fifth, this isn't as much a criticism as an observation that the leaders the US installed in Japan were war criminals...picture Goebbels leading Germany after WW2. More generally, Japan was a democracy but not much of one as the LDP has been in power pretty much continuously since 1955 with the help of CIA dollars...democracy indeed.

 

sixth, there are lots of examples of dictatorships overseeing huge economic growth...most impressive is obviously Korea which was poorer than a lot of sub-Saharan countries in the 60s and Park Chung-hee is typically credited with doing a lot there.

 

seventh, recent Iranian elections were pretty much fair...the famous US attitude of "democracy...as long as you vote for who we say" springs to mind.

 

I don't really have any point here...real life unfortunately isn't as simple as democracy = good/peaceful, dictatorship bad/warlike. The doctrine of perpetual war embraced by the US cabinet about ten years ago is a case in point (the concept of an unelected cabinet could seem strange to an outsider too). It is also worth bearing in mind that there is often a whole lot of context with these situations...Mao wasn't a particularly good leader but it is worth considering that China had been in a state of perpetual war, internally and against Japan, since the fall of the Qing in the early twentieth century. Likewise, India embraced democracy early but hasn't been successful economically, has a history of frosty relations with surrounding countries, and ethnic tension which, some would say, can be related to the government. All these are a function, I think, of the wider context that democracy operates in. It is generally accepted that in theory democracy is better...proving this is quite different from saying it should be applied everywhere tomorrow or that one version of "better" applies in all cases. Even more worrying is the idea that a certain government is illegitimate or wrong because they don't have the same political structure as you (more often than not, other governments, the US included, don't care what type of government other countries have. ideological arguments are often a pretext for something else). Just a thought though.

[turar]

isnt singapore sort of a dictator ship? Or like half a democracy where the guy elected stays in power for like 16 years? It works pretty amazing there. I guess if you have the right dictator alot of great things can happen. If you have democracy you will always have mediocracy.

Yes, it's a de-facto dictatorship -- single party rule since 1959, one guy in office for 30 years, and now his son is in office.

 

And just to clarify what I meant by Chinese vs American leadership. If you look at the biographies of Obama, Biden, Pelosi, etc., they're all lawyers with not much experience outside politics. I'd say the majority of Congress are lawyers or career politicians as well. All of Supreme Court are obviously lawyers. If you look at biographies of Chinese Politburo members, there are career chemical engineers, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, other technical guys, economists, PhDs of all sorts, etc. They do have people from "political dynasties" too, but it's a pretty healthy looking mix overall. If I were to run a country, I would prefer the latter to a bunch of lawyers.

[rkbabang]

Fortunately, Chinese are not led by populists the way the US is, and I believe their leadership is more rational.

 

I think Churchill sums it up best:

 

Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

 

I disagree. Even many dictatorships have outperformed democracy. At least democracy as we define it nowadays with an equal voting right for everyone. I think that's one of the most naive and stupid things ever envisioned by humans.

 

Indeed.  Government is the legitimization of aggressive violence.  A benevolent dictator can certainly be much better than democracy, in fact with democracy you are almost guaranteeing that it will be a hot mess.  Of course, of all the governments and systems tried by man the only thing humans have yet to attempt is to stop trying to legitimize offensive violence.  Yes I know, you think violence is necessary to build roads, put out fires, and educate children.  I disagree.

[bmichaud]

Larry's latest lol:

 

http://www.swingtradingdaily.com/2013/12/16/2014-the-first-year-of-the-21st-century-dark-age/