Abc News: Geithner Won’t Rule Out New Taxes For Middle Class

[Censored by Laurie]

This is very interesting....Thanks for responding Cody.

A follow-up question for you or anyone else who wants to jump in.

Would you say one's feelings about economic systems influences their political feelings or vice versa? In other words, is one dominant to the extent that it drives the other or are they too intertwinded to think of them separately? I guess where I was going with this is that there is a lot of banter back and forth in this forum that seems overtly political in nature (democratic vs republican, liberal vs conservative, etc.). I'm wondering if, deep down, these debates are really about different economic philosophies and they are just masquerading as political.

Keith

In part...but certainly not entirerly.

I know, for example, that UNTFlyer is extremely fiscally "conservative", yet his views socially tend to lean further left. By contrast, I'm sure there is a segment of society that are pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gay Socialists.

I think mosts economic opinion comes down simply to who they feel more comfortable trusting. The conservative views government as a massive, bloated body bent on power and control and that corporations, industry and the free market will provide to those who work for it...while those who don't have, don't as a result of their idleness. By contrast, others like myself, view government as an inefficient yet generally benevolant figure with the best interest of the general public at heart and that profit and greed driven business is in effect zero sum...those that have, have at the expense of those who don't.

[UNT90]

It goes beyond philanthropic giving. Starbucks treats their employees wonderfully and their purchasing practices are not in accordance with what would be considered purely profit motivated. A company like Wal-Mart can't say that.

Really?

http://walmartstores.com/FactsNews/NewsRoom/6361.aspx

http://walmartstores.com/CommunityGiving/203.aspx

http://walmartstores.com/FactsNews/NewsRoom/4581.aspx

Remember, this money is generated from profit, then re-invested into the community, not to mention the huge amount of people that make their living as an employee of Walmart.

This is the same company that hires elderly as greeters at their stores. Something tells me that is more a community function than really having the need for a greeter.

Companies are very cognizant of their public perception. The federal government? Not so much.

**Don't confuse politicians for the government. Whole different animal.

[UNT90]

This is very interesting....Thanks for responding Cody.

A follow-up question for you or anyone else who wants to jump in.

Would you say one's feelings about economic systems influences their political feelings or vice versa? In other words, is one dominant to the extent that it drives the other or are they too intertwinded to think of them separately? I guess where I was going with this is that there is a lot of banter back and forth in this forum that seems overtly political in nature (democratic vs republican, liberal vs conservative, etc.). I'm wondering if, deep down, these debates are really about different economic philosophies and they are just masquerading as political.

Keith

As one very smart politician once said "It's the economy, stupid." People are concerned about what affects them. Notice how quickly the War issue disappeared in the election last year once the economy tanked. Human Nature. People are concerned about what directly affects them and their families.

Political cheerleading is apparent from both sides. There are very recent examples of people advocating one thing in one post, and the direct opposite in another. Why? Because that is their team's position. Intelligent conversation be damned.

Remember the Cheney - Leiberman debate before the 2000 election? Two grown adults, calmly sitting at a table, discussing differences on issues like adults. Everyone commented on that afterward that those 2 seamed more Presidential than either Bush or Gore did in their debate (Remember the standing confrontation?). No one is going to change anyone's mind and it seems like people are just trying to scoreboard each other.

But ain't it fun??

[yyz28]

By contrast, others like myself, view government as an inefficient yet generally benevolant figure with the best interest of the general public at heart and that profit and greed driven business is in effect zero sum...those that have, have at the expense of those who don't.

The entirety of world history would disagree with this statement. While I believe THIS government is the best man has ever devised, it is still loaded with corruption and profit motive. You can see it on both sides of the isle. Power and staying in office is far more important than helping the people. Rewarding the groups that got you into office is far more important than doing what is in the best interest of the general public. Government is fundamentally corrupting, and the founders knew this and tried to control the size and scope of the government under the constitution. The firewalls in that document were blown past years ago (the largest hole placed in it in the 30's and 40's with the new deal, though Nationalized Healthcare will make the new deal look like a small expendeture) and now power and the desire to line their own and their friends pockets are the motivations of most in government. I DO truely believe that many individuals in Government are benevolant and want what is best for everyone - but the government as a whole is simply inefficient, bloated, corrupt and growing in power daily. The more power the federal government has, the less freedoms you have. This is a simple truth that escapes the statist who believes the government is basically a "good guy" trying to look out for everyone.

...the fact that you believe government won't deny claims simply proves you haven't studied the history of socialized govnerment medicine across the world. Rationing is a part of the deal. Denying cliaims to the elderly is part of the deal. There simply isn't the money to cover unlimited demand on the system, even if we raise taxes to 50% across the board. Claims will HAVE to get denyed as there is only so much to go around. A single payer system, which is what this is all about, despite the misinformation being pushed out there, will fail here as it has everywhere else it has been tried. Long waits, long lines and rationing is the endgame of national healthcare. When the "benevolant" government has your very life and health in its hands, you are no longer free.

[UNTflyer]

In part...but certainly not entirerly.

I know, for example, that UNTFlyer is extremely fiscally "conservative", yet his views socially tend to lean further left.

Technically, my fiscal and social views are "conservative" from the perspective of "keep government out" as much as possible. I anger a lot of my Republican friends when I say the true conservative position on abortion should be Pro-Choice.

[yyz28]

Fixed.

The 0-60mph in 3.9sec, perfect torque curve, 244mi range, 248HP Tesla Roadster would like a word with you.

And just for reference, the 2009 Nissan GT-R can go 0-60 in 3.9sec, and the 2010 Shelby GT500 takes 4.3sec to go 0-60.

The engineering data from the Tesla will be adopted into more consumer-grade cars and made more affordable. The Tesla is really a great foundation for electric cars.

The Tesla BASE MODEL, no options, is $101,500.

It should be able to run with the other supercars out there for that price. I've got a little Camaro that would like to have a word with it. (and that overrated GT-R POS, but that's a topic for another thread entirely...)

I don't think Flyer was suggesting that electric cars won't be big in the future, but PRIVATE BUSINESS should develop them on their own and build cars as technology evolves that consumers want. THEN people will come and buy them all on their own because they are better than their Gas counterparts. It shouldn't be Government in the car building and R&D business (GM not withstanding) it should be private enterprise.

Flyer is correct in saying electric cars that price within my reach (and probabaly yours...) DO, in fact... SUCK.

10 years down the road, maybe we'll all feel differently.

[yyz28]

Technically, my fiscal and social views are "conservative" from the perspective of "keep government out" as much as possible. I anger a lot of my Republican friends when I say the true conservative position on abortion should be Pro-Choice.

I acutally agree with you Flyer. I, however, want to see Roe v. Wade overturned as it is bad law based on a right (the "made up" right to privacy) that doesn't exist in the Constitution. Abortion should be a states level issue.

[NT03]

In part...but certainly not entirerly.

I know, for example, that UNTFlyer is extremely fiscally "conservative", yet his views socially tend to lean further left. By contrast, I'm sure there is a segment of society that are pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gay Socialists.

I think mosts economic opinion comes down simply to who they feel more comfortable trusting. The conservative views government as a massive, bloated body bent on power and control and that corporations, industry and the free market will provide to those who work for it...while those who don't have, don't as a result of their idleness. By contrast, others like myself, view government as an inefficient yet generally benevolant figure with the best interest of the general public at heart and that profit and greed driven business is in effect zero sum...those that have, have at the expense of those who don't.

Is that you swimming in the Colebrook ???

Edited August 6, 2009 by NT03

[Censored by Laurie]

Is that you swimming in the Colebrook ???

That is me swimming in Black Rock Harbour in Bridgeport, CT knocking out the last leg of the Swim Across the Sound

[hickoryhouse]

Fixed.

The 0-60mph in 3.9sec, perfect torque curve, 244mi range, 248HP Tesla Roadster would like a word with you.

And just for reference, the 2009 Nissan GT-R can go 0-60 in 3.9sec, and the 2010 Shelby GT500 takes 4.3sec to go 0-60.

The engineering data from the Tesla will be adopted into more consumer-grade cars and made more affordable. The Tesla is really a great foundation for electric cars.

There is a consumer demand for these cars, the Chevy Volt has been receiving great reviews and huge crowds at auto shows world wide, Chrysler is in the process of making one too...

I feel however that all of these electric cars are just going to be a stepping stone or a bridge between normal petroleum powered vehicles to Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered vehicles...

I digress, my point is that there is a consumer demand out there and the markets are responding, albeit slowly, to the growing interest in this market segment.

The interest has been there for years, does anyone remember this ill fated attempt by GM back in the 90's?

[meangreendork]

The Tesla BASE MODEL, no options, is $101,500.

It should be able to run with the other supercars out there for that price. I've got a little Camaro that would like to have a word with it. (and that overrated GT-R POS, but that's a topic for another thread entirely...)

I don't think Flyer was suggesting that electric cars won't be big in the future, but PRIVATE BUSINESS should develop them on their own and build cars as technology evolves that consumers want. THEN people will come and buy them all on their own because they are better than their Gas counterparts. It shouldn't be Government in the car building and R&D business (GM not withstanding) it should be private enterprise.

Flyer is correct in saying electric cars that price within my reach (and probabaly yours...) DO, in fact... SUCK.

10 years down the road, maybe we'll all feel differently.

The Tesla's more like a high-price prototype in my mind, but it does say "hey, electric cars aren't just limited to crap performance". And don't forget, your Camaro is an all-out muscle car that balances the poor combustion qualities of gasoline by simply burning a lot of it at one time. Mind you, I don't have a problem with Camaros, depending on the model year. Don't ask me what I think of most Mustangs, though.

The Tesla is a start point for other car manufacturers - I think that it's motor/battery design is being used by other manufacturers since Tesla was partially government funded, if I remember right. Toyota's Prius is a dinosaur by comparison to the Tesla and the Dodge EV (which is strikingly similar to the Tesla), and the Volt is a good start for the general consumer's electric car. And yeah, the Tesla is out of my range. Funny enough, it does outperform its "cousin" in the Lotus Elise and Lotus Evora.

As for electric cars, I think they're a stepping stone too. On the horizon is the Honda FCX Clarity, which is Hydrogen->Electric. The range is pretty good (288mi electric). On the really distant horizon is the CitroenGT, which is supposed to be powered by hydrogen cells that power it to something like 700HP or so.

And to the point about government placement in it, I would say it depends on how the project is handled. If it's handled like the progression from the AR15 to the M16 (let's not chrome some of the valuable workings of a weapon that operates with direct impingement, yeah), it's going to be awful. If it's handled like the YF17/YF16 projects, then the results will be awesome. Really, the key point is that there's a good, healthy competition involved. If it's private companies that have huge disparities in funding and other resources, we're going to be stuck with one product that will probably be disappointing. If the resources are close, then the competition will probably be better and the results better as well.

[hickoryhouse]

And don't forget, your Camaro is an all-out muscle car that balances the poor combustion qualities of gasoline by simply burning a lot of it at one time. Mind you, I don't have a problem with Camaros, depending on the model year. Don't ask me what I think of most Mustangs, though.

I digress...

Just because I love the Camaros and miss mine immensely, I have to disagree on your assertions of inefficient fuel management by that car. While if driven flat out you are correct, that car will burn a very generous amount of fuel as does any car that creates large amounts of horsepower, with rare exceptions. However, when driven conservatively I was able to get 28-32 mpg Hwy out of my old 2000 SS thanks to the well thought out 6th gear that GM installed in the vehicle. I could also get around 22-24 mpg in the city.

It matters how you drive the car...

Now back to the normal discussion.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Technically, my fiscal and social views are "conservative" from the perspective of "keep government out" as much as possible. I anger a lot of my Republican friends when I say the true conservative position on abortion should be Pro-Choice.

Wow--- you see the difference... I have always thought the same. The guys we had for eight years have been "Religious conservatives" not really "political conservatives". If they had been political/financial conservatives they would not have doubled the national debt. I know you think I am an extreme liberal but I don't think I am at all... in fact I think I am conservative...especially on financial issues. The last eight years was the most liberal financially ever. They cut taxes, then increased spending, and thought they had to right to invade countries and run them. Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11 and he had done no terrorists acts against us. A true conservative would have left them alone... I can't run my next-door neighbors affairs either even though I may not agree with him and some of his actions..

---Too bad too many just didn't get you can't cut taxes unless you cut spending... First you cut wasteful spending when there is some and then youadjust the taxes to fit the tax cuts..... They were idiots financially that wanted also to tell others how to run their countries. the folks Saddam (thug) killed were the same Islamic terrorists we hate and and he feared them because they might to to him what they had done in Iran...take over.

--They kept yelling about government interference (oversight) .... well they got them in financial community and the idiots made a lot of stupid high end loans for expensive houseing and condos.. [check on Florida, California and Los Vegas.... the worst repo areas.] This is not about loans to lower income at all... yes some have happened after the unemployment climbed partly because of the crazy high priced loans went to hell. Classrooms can't even be run without some runs and supervision.... much less Wall Street and the banking sector.

---They claim the Democrats want to take your guns... well that isn't true either.... maybe a few but not in general... and even then mostly extreme type guns... assault weapons with insane clips and speed ...not ordinary pistrols, hunting rifles or shotguns...

---They got kicked out of office because they honestly weren't financial conservative and even wanted to run other countries by claiming they were developing WMD (we never found them, at least nothing meaningful) .

--Have a great day yawl, enjoy the ecomony Bush left us.... and learn what a real conservative is... it is not about religious issues ( I regularly attend church am not some atheist freak) .. also let schools be school and don't try to make them places of worship.... not everyone there has the same beliefs and not even every Christian believes the same. I am so conservative that I don't think the school has a right to tell me or my kids what to believe.

Edited August 7, 2009 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNT90]

It matters how you drive the car...

And that goes for compacts, also. Give me a Hybrid and I bet I could bring the MPG on that puppy down to about 15.

[FirefightnRick]

I digress...

Just because I love the Camaros and miss mine immensely, I have to disagree on your assertions of inefficient fuel management by that car. While if driven flat out you are correct, that car will burn a very generous amount of fuel as does any car that creates large amounts of horsepower, with rare exceptions. However, when driven conservatively I was able to get 28-32 mpg Hwy out of my old 2000 SS thanks to the well thought out 6th gear that GM installed in the vehicle. I could also get around 22-24 mpg in the city.

It matters how you drive the car...

Now back to the normal discussion.

Exactly. I drove an '85 GT Mustang, the last year of the carburetored Mustang, with 210 H.P, for over 10 years and consistantly got 25 mpg on road trips.

Rick

[yyz28]

I digress...

Just because I love the Camaros and miss mine immensely, I have to disagree on your assertions of inefficient fuel management by that car. While if driven flat out you are correct, that car will burn a very generous amount of fuel as does any car that creates large amounts of horsepower, with rare exceptions. However, when driven conservatively I was able to get 28-32 mpg Hwy out of my old 2000 SS thanks to the well thought out 6th gear that GM installed in the vehicle. I could also get around 22-24 mpg in the city.

It matters how you drive the car...

Now back to the normal discussion.

Yup... Heads/Cam/Stroker/Stalled 2000Z28 - gets about 15 in town and about 25 on the road... (Gotta love having a lock-up clutch in the converter.)

...but at Wide Open Throttle, I can watch the gas gauge drop. LOL!

Rumpity, Rumpity.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

I digress...

Just because I love the Camaros and miss mine immensely, I have to disagree on your assertions of inefficient fuel management by that car. While if driven flat out you are correct, that car will burn a very generous amount of fuel as does any car that creates large amounts of horsepower, with rare exceptions. However, when driven conservatively I was able to get 28-32 mpg Hwy out of my old 2000 SS thanks to the well thought out 6th gear that GM installed in the vehicle. I could also get around 22-24 mpg in the city.

It matters how you drive the car...

Now back to the normal discussion.

MGD may have been referring to the efficiency differences between an internal combustion motor and an electric motor. I've read in a couple different articles (but can't remember where) that electric motors are inherently much more efficient than IC's. Anybody have any data or other knowledge that backs up or disproves this?

[hickoryhouse]

MGD may have been referring to the efficiency differences between an internal combustion motor and an electric motor. I've read in a couple different articles (but can't remember where) that electric motors are inherently much more efficient than IC's. Anybody have any data or other knowledge that backs up or disproves this?

Theoretically the electric motor and even the fuel cell types of engines provide for instant torque whereas the IC engine requires increased rpm's and larger explosions to increase torque. That being said an electric motor consumes no fossil fuels whatsoever so the efficiency of that motor is infinitely greater than that of any IC engine, I would think...

[yyz28]

Theoretically the electric motor and even the fuel cell types of engines provide for instant torque whereas the IC engine requires increased rpm's and larger explosions to increase torque. That being said an electric motor consumes no fossil fuels whatsoever so the efficiency of that motor is infinitely greater than that of any IC engine, I would think...

This thread should be split into it's own topic now... LOL!

...but to measure the efficiency of electircs against IC's you have to look at the whole picture over the vehicle's lifetime.

Electrics take more energy to build. Electricity isn't free, it must be made by burning coal, water turning turbines, etc. In the end they ARE more efficient in terms of power needed to be produced and go 100,000 miles, but IC cars are cheper and more efficiant to produce, and are instantly rechargable (simply fill up.)

I think that electrics will come into their own in the next few years and be common in-town commuters. ...but Hydrogyn or something along those lines will have to replace gasoline and be able to power large cars and get refueled anywhere making the range basically infinate just like cars are today before there will be a major change in the consumer's desires.