That I know, I am just not getting the context.

Giving the people an absolute freedom without any government control is risky and there is no guarantee that it will work. There are too many factors nowadays that prevent people from consuming.



Tell me a startegy that hasn't ever failed yet?
It is false? I do beg to disagree here. The government is more effective because of the lack of predictability of the private sector.

If you think it's amoral, why not abolish taxes whatsoever?

So your whole argument hinges on the fact that the U.S. has to have the best social network in the world? Why is that? Personally, I could care less about social networks. I feel they're a waste of money.
If I want to sponsor somebody's education or health insurance, then I will do it on my own; I don't need the government telling me how to do it.

And yes, there is a Welafer system in the U.S. But it's nowhere near as wasteful as the welfare system set up in Germany, where all your expenses are covered, and you don't have to bother finding a job.

That day already came and passed. Top rate used be hovering around 90%. Then the rates came down, most recently they were cut to 35%.

Even that is too much, if you ask me, but first the government needs to cut its spending.

There's no VAT in the U.S.; a lot of states have a sales tax, which is different in nature, and even then, not all states have it.


Again, based on what criteria? Yes, we import more than we export, but in turn, we get more capital coming in here.

Well, if the balance of payments is balanced, then it's only natural that the current account deficit is offset by the capital inflow into the U.S.

This is where the problem is. You import more than you export, therefore you have the deficit. You also attract foreign investors that make up for the deficit. However, in future the number of foreign ivestments in the USA will go down, the account deficit however, doesn't seem to lower now or in future. Sooner or later there won't be enough foreign investors. Do you expect the account deficit to disappear automatically then?

The rest, I'll address when I'm back from a movie

No, not a German scheisse film

Instead, we should rely on someone really smart (preferrably you), sitting in the government office in DC (or in Berlin) to make the decisions for us. That oughta cure all the problems.

Tell me what your stated goals are.


You can't be serious. Tell me, is there a problem with the computer sector in Germany? Clothing? Paper industry? Plastics? Rastaurant and hotel? Tourism?

I suspect not.

What about social services? Education? Phone industry? Transportation? No problems there? I suspect a bit of a different answer.

Notice the pattern?


It is ammoral to use taxes to try and pump money from one group of people to another; however the government has legitimate goals, such as defense and punishment for the crimes. It has to be financed somehow. So some taxes and levies are not amoral, but the more the government taxes its citizens, the more wasteful it becomes.

If there's nobody sponsoring the deficit, then there can't be a deficit. Econ 101.

Is there a problem with clothing? Computer sector etc.? Yes, there is one. They all moved out of Germany. Welcome in the United Europe with the Euro taking care of the transparency.

Tourism? With the increased Euro the number of tourists ceases to lower.

Phone industry? It's by far no longer government controlled here. Transportation? It is losing money, sure, but what country's transportation doesn't? People have cars in plenty. Living in the USA, you should know that.

I don't think you understand. The way you present it, is that an account deficit is a good thing. There is a difference between buying a ton of Italian oranges and Italian companies coming to the USA and investing money in there.

My goals are the four I stated above. If I knew a way how to accomplish tgem all without negative side effects, I would have won the Nobel and become Germany's new secretary of finances. There is no way how to solve all the problems. There will never be one, you just need to decide for a better strategy because there is no perfect one.

I suppose if you knew the solution for all the problems you'd be in the government as well

Is there a problem with clothing? Computer sector etc.? Yes, there is one. They all moved out of Germany. Welcome in the United Europe with the Euro taking care of the transparency.

Tourism? With the increased Euro the number of tourists ceases to lower.[/quote]

These are not problems, these are realities of the laws of economics. These companies are making money becuase that's their goal.

Are you willing to spend your hard-earned money to keep the companies in Germany?


In other words all the government-run industry is doing as well as the private sector. You seriously believe that?

IF I planned on living in Germany for the rest of my life, then YES. I do not only think of myself right here, right now. The unemployment rate caused by companies moving out and the smaller GDP will get back at me anyway. Therefore, I'd spend my hard.earned money to the benefit of the state.





I do. Both do equally bad.

At least two of the goals you put forth I do not agree with (account balance and full employment).

There is no reason to try and balance the current (I assume that's what you meant by account balance) account artificially; if foreign countries are selling us products cheaper than we can make them, then absolutely we should be running a current account deficit.

As for full employment - I do not believe in the right to work. A person's skills have to be demanded, otherwise employing him/her makes absolutely no sense.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "price stability". The prices are always going up; if they're not, its' pretty bad for the economy - just take a look at Japan.


If I wanted to be in the government, I'd already be a public servant.

I doesn't HAVE to have the best social network in the world. The USA just proves the general selfishness of people and the fact that only the strongest survive.

If not the expenses, what else is a welfare system supposed to cover?

You always like to point the finger at the U.S., well here's your other chance: in the U.S. the outsourcing is pretty much unlimited and has been for a long time now, but the unemployment rate is half that of Germany, where it's very hard to let workers go. What gives?

Could it be that when you outsource you make more profit to be reinvested?


By what criteria? The private sector has one and only goal: make money. Are you suggesting that it's failing in that task?

You're saying it as if being selfish is bad

Well, the system in the U.S. covers some of your expenses, but for a limited amount of time. You HAVE to find yourself a job.

Mind you, I do not agree witht hat system either.

Reinvested by...whom?




I do. Both do equally bad.[/quote]
By what criteria? The private sector has one and only goal: make money. Are you suggesting that it's failing in that task?[/quote]

1. They moved out of Germany

2. Those that didn't, tend to, indeed, fail. You should see thousands of people being fired nowadays in Germany by companies like Siemens.

I mean the magical quadrangle, which shows the rate of fulfilment of four traditional targets of economic policy. Rings a bell?

"As for full employment - I do not believe in the right to work. A person's skills have to be demanded, otherwise employing him/her makes absolutely no sense."

So what do you think shall a person do whose skilles are not as demanded considering that you are against welfare...? :?



You suggest that if you were in charge here, our economy would be doing better?

Oh, I forgot, let's just have the unemployed people starve to death. Why care if you are doing great anyway?



Looks like you're not up to date with German system either. You HAVE to find yourself a job in a limited amount of time as well.

By those same companies that outsourced. It's quite simple: if I can save $50 million by moving my manufacturing plant to Mexico, then I can spend that $50 million to fund more R&D, marketing, planning, etc. In each scenario, I end up making even more money.




I do. Both do equally bad.[/quote]
By what criteria? The private sector has one and only goal: make money. Are you suggesting that it's failing in that task?[/quote]

1. They moved out of Germany

2. Those that didn't, tend to, indeed, fail. You should see thousands of people being fired nowadays in Germany by companies like Siemens.[/quote]
1. Does a company have to stay in Germany to be successful?

2. Do you think it has anything to do with the very restrictive laws concerning employment in Germany?

Who says I agree with the "traditional targets of economic policy"?

They should learn new skills.




You suggest that if you were in charge here, our economy would be doing better? [/quote]
I suggest that I don't want to be in charge there. But if Germany adopted a more open approach to the economy, then yes, it would be doing better.

And who says that the earned/saved money will be reinvested in Germany and benefit Germany in any way?




1. No, it doesn't, but I am talking about companies IN Germany right now and not in Poland.

2. What the heck yre you talking about? What restrictive laws?

You feel passinate about the unemployed people? Good. Spend your own money to help them. WHy do you insist that others should have the same moral values as you do?

I guess they reformed it a little. Good for them.

Now, what was the need for the reform? I doubt it was because the old system was working out well.

That, I noticed by now. Maybe you should write a book on your strategies. By some chance it'll be as widely recognized and popular as Keynes'. Maybe you can revolutionize and revive the economy slump in which about 85% of countries in the world are right now and win the Nobel.



Freedom of choice is great, eh? :? :?




If it was as easy and logical as you make it seem, it would have been done.

That, I noticed by now. Maybe you should write a book on your strategies. By some chance it'll be as widely recognized and popular as Keynes'. Maybe you can revolutionize and revive the economy slump in which about 85% of countries in the world are right now and win the Nobel.



Freedom of choice is great, eh? :? :?


[/quote="Krem"]
I suggest that I don't want to be in charge there. But if Germany adopted a more open approach to the economy, then yes, it would be doing better.[/quote]

If it was as easy and logical as you make it seem, it would have been done.