11–20 of 66 posts
As an 18 year old reading this sort of writing makes me want to leave the country. Except that I'd be taxed for ten years after expatriating, and there isn't any country that I know of as being similarly entrepreneurial. If anyone has suggestions, though, I would love to hear them.
Wasn't it Warren Buffet that mentioned he pays less taxes than his secretary? Or is this propaganda that I've been duped into believing?
There seemed to be a disconnect here. Just because one is a Baby Boomer (i.e., has life experience) that doesn't give one the magic ability to predict the economic future of, really, the entire world. This article takes the tone of a wizened elder bestowing his wealth of knowledge on the younger generation but it's really just another futurist taking potshots on what's to come for the United States. At this point the…
I would at least give it more credence if it was from someone who appeared to have any sort of track record with or familiarity with economics. Looking at this guy's past columns, I see a pretty strange mix of stuff: http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/
Being a 22 year old myself, I'm grateful that nothing in here is surprising to me and that my parents made me start a savings account when I was young (like 10 or something). To be honest, I don't think I've met anyone from my generation who expects to see money from social security when they retire.
A government mandated Ponzi scheme. Brilliant. :(
The real problem people are complaining about is the burden that was shared by many (by having lots of kids) is going to be shared by fewer and fewer people.
There seemed to be a disconnect here. Just because one is a Baby Boomer (i.e., has life experience) that doesn't give one the magic ability to predict the economic future of, really, the entire world. This article takes the tone of a wizened elder bestowing his wealth of knowledge on the younger generation but it's really just another futurist taking potshots on what's to come for the United States. At this point the…
> At this point there are so many people talking of what's 'inevitable' that I'm disinclined to trust anyone who has a prediction range longer than a week. I would at least give it more credence if it was from someone who appeared to have any sort of track record with or familiarity with economics. Looking at this guy's past columns, I see a pretty strange mix of stuff: http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/
I teach practical ministry courses at Indiana Wesleyan University. I write a weekly Tuesday Column during the school year and am usually backpacking or bicycling in the summer.
A real economics guru we've found.
Interesting thought on the tax loophole closing (when considered a bit more broadly). If we must put up with high taxes, then what's the point if only the people who can afford clever accountants can find a way to shuffle money to loophole their way into lower tax brackets? I used to work for a Hollywood account, and every single actor has their own company for this reason. Wasn't it Warren Buffet that mentioned he p…
Whether it's a good example, propagandistic, etc., is another story, but on the factual question of whether he said it, he did. The main reason isn't so much loopholes as source of income: employment income (what his secretary gets) is taxed at a higher rate than investment income (what Buffett gets).
It amazes me how people fail to see their own Luddite-ism. Look, here's the deal: The Luddites protested the mechanization of the textile industry during the industrial revolution. Their reasoning was that if one person maintaining one machine could do the same work as 100 individual laborers, then that would mean 99 people out of work. It turns out, what businesses actually did was keep all 100 workers employed and instead turned out 100 times the product.
The U.S. (and the rest of the developed world) is only in trouble if we cannot continue to grow our economy exponentially (and keep in mind that an exponential increase in efficiency or an exponential decrease in material costs is just as good as an exponential increase in gross product). What really _kills_ me, though, is that the very thing that we need to achieve sustained growth is the very same thing that people are trying to cut out: funding for science and technology research.
Every time I hear some Republican's campaign add talk about: "Can you believe we spend money digging up dinosaur bones in China? Shouldn't we spend that money at home?", I die a little inside. If China overtakes the U.S. as a world power, it will be due, in part, to the rapid increase in Ph.D.s and research funding that they are currently undertaking.
In the history of the world, there has never been a time when the most powerful nation was not also the most technologically advanced.
America isn't remotely close to a serious debate.
The problem with articles like this is that they assume the country is still capable of negotiating changes that would require significant shared sacrifices. The last thirty years, and 2008-2010 in particular, show exactly the opposite. Americans are going to insist on high spending and low taxes until a serious, generational crisis like the Great Depression makes that impossible.
Can anyone seriously look at the political culture today and imagine that a VAT could become law? Or that anyone is going to fall on their sword to cut Medicare and Social Security benefits? If anything is clear about American politics since the emergence of movement conservatism, it's that any attempt to increase taxes or tackle popular social programs is political suicide. Look at Obama's health care bill. I hope you like it, because no one is going to touch healthcare again in our generation.
I expect exactly nothing to be done about America's problems until those problems are so serious and the social dislocation so severe, that one party assumes near-dictatorial control of Congress and the motivation to use it, as happened during the Depression. There was an opportunity for rapprochement after the 2008 election, but that moment has passed. Now it's only a matter of time until the next, far more serious crisis.
If you want to plan for the future, don't assume American politics is somehow going to become more rational on its own. Plan for the crisis. Invest defensively. Don't assume the existence of government programs or the absence of sudden, sharp tax hikes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At this point there are so many people talking of what's 'inevitable' that I'm disinclined to trust anyone who has a prediction range longer than a week. I would at least give it more credence if it was from someone who appeared to have any sort of track record with or familiarity with economics. Looking at this guy's past columns, I see a pretty strange mix of stuff: http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/
Ugh. Yeah I found this. I teach practical ministry courses at Indiana Wesleyan University. I write a weekly Tuesday Column during the school year and am usually backpacking or bicycling in the summer. A real economics guru we've found.
As an 18 year old reading this sort of writing makes me want to leave the country. Except that I'd be taxed for ten years after expatriating, and there isn't any country that I know of as being similarly entrepreneurial. If anyone has suggestions, though, I would love to hear them.