eCharcha.Com   Support eCharcha.Com. Click on sponsor ad to shop online!

Advertise Here

Go Back   eCharcha.Com > LifeStyle > Life Abroad

Notices

Life Abroad All about life away from home

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 16th, 2001, 08:19 AM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute
Good news for those in the US..

Tax cut clears senate finance ..

WASHINGTON, May 15 — The Senate Finance Committee voted Tuesday to approve a bipartisan tax cut package after supporters fought off amendments pushed by outnumbered Democrats to increase the benefits for lower-income people...

THE 13-5 VOTE cleared the way for the 11-year, $1.35 trillion bill to reach the Senate floor as early as Wednesday. Republican leaders hope to pass the measure by week’s end, with the ultimate goal of reaching a final tax cut deal with the House and getting the bill to President Bush by Memorial Day.
“We hope to move the bill very quickly through the Senate,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chairman.
Grassley and most of the panel’s 10 Republicans were joined in opposing many amendments and on the final vote by four of the 10 Democrats: Sens. Max Baucus of Montana, John Breaux of Louisiana, Robert Torricelli of New Jersey and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.
“This is a starting point, not the final,” Breaux said. “We are a long ways from getting a final product

Read more at ..
http://www.msnbc.com/news/556533.asp

Reactions ??
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 16th, 2001, 08:46 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up my reaction ....

I like everything that puts more money in my pocket.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 16th, 2001, 08:59 AM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
Well supposedly better way of doing it rather than increasing government spending by the same amount because that has greater risks of inflation but on the other hand had the government increased its spending maybe the economy would have recovered faster and harder because government cpital spending increases the demand for evertything from petrochemicals to computers....the tax refunds can lead to increased savings and maybe investment wont be as much affected as desired therefore the overall multiplier effect as we call it wont be as large.....government could have used the money to increase spending on health infrastructure for example...

Anyhow politics is not about policies its about populism and this certainly is the most popular way...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 16th, 2001, 09:02 AM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute
Laal, that is the democrat (liberal) viewpoint ..

The republican stand is .. less spending by govt .. more money in peoples pockets .. more spending by public .. eceonomy recovers ..

I do agree, though. If there is a surplus, we need to get it back.. a surplus is from overtaxation .. increasing govt spending to consume a surplus is not the right approach, IMO
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 16th, 2001, 09:18 AM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
Smelly pahji I dont represent any of the camps so I am not talking from that perspective.....I am talking from my forte which is economics/finance...

The demand and supply curves that we have in economics....in Macroeconomics the demand curve shifts more for a given level of governmen spending that for the equivalent amount going into the peoples pockets directly because then it gets split between spending increases and savings....now savings wont help the companies unless you invest in their stocks or if you buy their products....

With government spending increases though you risk inflation the whole amount goes towards the purchase of goods and commodities leading to increased production/employment.....so I was just saying that there are benefits and problems with either approach....with government spending you can overheat the economy....with tax cuts you could possibly squander an opportunity to revive it....

As for overtaxing and the surplus....the surplus can arise due to many reasons bhaiya....and then it doesnt really relate to a large segment of the current population who have been paying taxes for say 23 or even 5 years and then there are desis who have migrated.....the surplus building process is one of decades where good spending in one year leads to lowered spending need in the next because the initial investment is highly productive....so the returning argument is not really applicable to all and sundry....the actual people who contributed to it might be watching maneka uravashi rambha dancing .....

And there are other sources of budget surplus.....anything from increased returns on government spending to a trade surplus due to a weak dollar....so where the surplus should be diverted....well double the opinions as the number of mouths...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 16th, 2001, 09:26 AM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute
You are correct in theory, Laalji. BUt history has shown that Americans are poor savers anyway. Any money in their pockets is spent And in this day and age, even savings are usually invested in Mutual funds etc, not just bank balances ..

All in all, more than half of the governments income is from Income taxes. If there is a surplus, that means that the govt overestimated their requirement for tax money, based on projected returns from other sources. Give the money back to the people, let them spend it how they deem fit. I am not saying that we strip the govt down to barebones. All I am saying is that we should not increase govt size purely on the basis of a surplus. Coz in tough years, you can always increase the tax again, but it is much harder to layoff these jobs that you just created in the govt.

Again, like you said, everyone has an opinion ..
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 16th, 2001, 11:02 AM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
Smelly pahji apun lamba naheen kheechegaa but will just mention few relevant bits...

Americans invest in the market through mutual funds ok....now the mutual fund performs something called mean variance optimisation and thus has to invest not entirely in stocks but in other instruments like government securities real estate etc which are not part of the stock market....so the amount invested in stocks is lower than initial amount invested.....from the stadnpoint of economic efficiency this is a wasteful process as higher transactions costs in the form of taxes stamp duties costs of managing such portfolios etc and the administrative costs lead to a dilution in the funds reaching the market....

The American population might not be good at savings from history....but data on the past 100 years of returns from US stocks and bonds says that the average return on US stocks is 6% higher than the return on bonds.....this implies two things either the US population is infinitely risk averse or that US stocks are exceptionally risky....the coefficients of risk aversion of the American population appear to be large enough to be stupid.....the total proportion of the US population investing in stocks is less than a third....this is called the equity premium or the risk free rate puzzle

The other thing about the government revenues.....well the US trade balance is of considerable size so its not just tax revenues....for the year 99 its 363 billion deficit and for 2000 its 265 deficit so that in itself improves the governemtn finances by about 100 billion...and then its not just income taxes...what about corporate taxes??

As for the government increasing its size....I am not saying that....increased spending by the government increases the demand for products by all companies and that leads to greater employment in the private sector.....the government's size has not much to do with it..

Talking about laying people off that will happen in either situation smelly bhaiya.....increased consumer spending will also lead to expansionary pursuits by companies and then they will lay people off in times of slowdown as they are now....because inflation will always occur with increased spending and when you attempt to curb it there will be an increase in unemployment...

The issue is how to maximise wealth when given the opportunity and a sizeable chunk of money to improve prospects..

Anyways like I said zyaada naheen kheenchegaa because diversity of opinion enriches the intellect and waise bhi main to kisi bhi side pe naheen hoon I was just saying that this methos compared to the other one of increased government spending or for that matter retiring government debt all have the problems and their benefits....and in the end the costs will be incurred by you the people albeit directly/indirectly
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old May 16th, 2001, 11:18 AM
Senorita's Avatar
Senorita Senorita is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 753
Senorita is on a distinguished road
LANGOT MEIN BAHUT PAISA HAI

LOOTO LOOTO

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old May 16th, 2001, 11:58 AM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute
Theek hai laal bhai,

lets agree to disagree. The economy does not follow theoretical models anyway. It is based on the whims and fancies of investors and can change with the size of the hemorrhoids of an ice cream vendor.

All other factors aside, IMO, the govt should be a net zero entity. At the end of the year, they should emerge as zero profit and zero loss. If there is a shortage, they recoup money with of bonds or increased taxes. If there is a sizeable surplus, I say, put away some money for a rainy day and return the rest to the taxpayers.

wait a minute .. its coming to me now ... "Green"span .. "Lal" Langot .. any relation .. ??
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:09 PM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
Smelly pahji asli relation hai between Gordon BROWN(UK ka finance minister called chancellor of the exchequer) and laal LANGOT...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:10 PM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute


Dont want to know how langot and BROWN are related ..
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:12 PM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
Its all about commercial PAPER
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:16 PM
Big-G's Avatar
Big-G Big-G is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,578
Big-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud of
One question: What color, which when mixed with red produces brown?
This is serious.
__________________
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a pissing section in a pool!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:19 PM
laal_langot's Avatar
laal_langot laal_langot is offline
loin.....loin cloth
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Pal Pal TIL ke paas tum rehte ho...
Posts: 3,070
laal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to beholdlaal_langot is a splendid one to behold
I wouldnt know because I never had to mix my output to achieve the right colour proportions....
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old May 16th, 2001, 12:20 PM
smellyfinger's Avatar
smellyfinger smellyfinger is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 8,851
smellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond reputesmellyfinger has a reputation beyond repute
black ..

why??
__________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good News Bad News Thread dirty Friday Special 12 July 4th, 2008 12:12 AM
Good and Bad News nauratankurma Jobs 13 June 22nd, 2006 04:35 PM
Good News Diplomat Taaza Khabar - Current news 64 April 21st, 2003 09:53 AM
Some Good News!!! Shringarey SoapBox 35 September 26th, 2002 12:39 PM
MAy be it's a good news for some Dude SoapBox 8 August 9th, 2002 02:46 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Site Copyright © eCharcha.Com 2000-2012.