• Re: "Castigo Cay" by Matthew Bracken

    From John Savard@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 22 14:35:02 2025
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year. Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity. Food and housing are comparatively expensive. The taxes have gone up including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such. Many people have left the USA looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 03:10:49 2025
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year. Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity. Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive. The taxes have gone up including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such. Many people have left the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent future.
    The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit is
    increasing. Keeping old people alive is very expensive as Medicare and
    Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I are the
    beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    The coming Codominion may shake things up though.

    Lynn


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From William Hyde@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 08:12:04 2025
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.˙ Food and >>> housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent future.
    ˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit is
    increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I are the
    beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about 65,
    France 90, the UK 100. Canada and the US are both about 120, Japan
    near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I do
    not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid. Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 09:01:23 2025
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value >>>> and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.˙ Food
    and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up including >>>> new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the USA >>>> looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit is
    increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as Medicare
    and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I are the
    beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about 65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120, Japan
    near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I do
    not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth. Many countries are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or their
    requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our indebtedness. But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now and
    in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits in the trillions of dollars.

    Lynn


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 10:51:14 2025
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its
    value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.
    Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up including >>>>> new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the USA >>>>> looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit
    is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as
    Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I
    are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about
    65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120,
    Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I
    do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many countries are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or their requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now and
    in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits in the trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    --
    I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
    dirty old man.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 12:45:08 2025
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its >>>>>> value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per >>>>>> gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.
    Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up
    including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the >>>>>> USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit
    is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as
    Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I
    are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about
    65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120,
    Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I
    do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France also. >>>
    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many countries
    are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or their
    requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our
    indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now and
    in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits in the
    trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Lynn



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 13:43:08 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/22/25 10:10, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.˙ Food and >>> housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent future.
    ˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit is
    increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I are the
    beneficiary of both).

    Actually what is running up the deficit is the Congress's failure to tax the
    Very Well Off and the Extremely Well-Compensated at rates that would pay
    for the cost of the wars we have been forced into on their behalf. The poor fought in those wars and many lives of the poor were wasted in one way
    and another with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrom and other problems.

    That has led to inflation in my lifetime of 1937-Now of prices of all goods even those that are of little value. A coke was a nickel when I was
    young and how expensive is it now? I dunno because some years back
    I gave up soft drinks as a regular thing in order to save money and also
    at the same time gave up SF magazine subscription which I formerly had
    to all the major magazines plus I bought English magazines off the news
    stand and all that was given up to save money.
    Now last year in the Autumn I broke my ankle and did not know
    that until in December when I saw a Orthopedic surgeon and saw
    the X-rays. On January 24th my surgery was done to fuse the ankle
    and I was in the hospital from then until April 11th.

    The charge for a month in the Rehab facility was around $28,000
    per month. The money was not going to the Nurses who took care of
    a variety of patients but to the cost of a building in Downtown San
    Francisco where it was situated about 4 blocks up and downhill
    from my apartment where i have lived for the last 50+ years.


    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    How about Norway, Denmark and Sweden, Gemany and France, Japan
    and India. China of course is its own case. Taiwan is doing well though we
    are not supposed to consider it a nation.


    The coming Codominion may shake things up though.


    Lynn

    I perfer to imagine the advent of Renee Schaeffer's Concensus. In the
    near future I will post my review of her work "Ageless".

    bliss

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 13:47:53 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/22/25 19:45, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its >>>>>>> value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per >>>>>>> gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.
    Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up
    including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left
    the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to >>>>>> hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit >>>>> is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as
    Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and
    I are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in
    very good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the >>>>> USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about
    65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120,
    Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I
    do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France
    also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many countries
    are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or their
    requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our
    indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now
    and in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits
    in the trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.


    Lynn

    The tax cuts for the very well off and the very well off caused those defictis
    and those happened in the Term of #45 a bigly foolish man called Trump.

    bliss

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 14:32:05 2025
    On 7/22/2025 10:43 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:


    On 7/22/25 10:10, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its value >>>> and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per
    gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.˙ Food
    and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up including >>>> new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left the USA >>>> looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to
    hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit is
    increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as Medicare
    and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and I are the
    beneficiary of both).

    ˙˙˙˙Actually what is running up the deficit is the Congress's failure
    to tax the
    Very Well Off and the Extremely Well-Compensated at rates that would pay
    for the cost of the wars we have been forced into on their behalf. The poor fought in those wars and many lives of the poor were wasted in one way
    and another with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrom and other problems.

    ˙˙˙˙That has led to inflation in my lifetime of 1937-Now of prices of all goods even those that are of little value. A coke was a nickel when I was young and how expensive is it now?˙ I dunno because some years back
    I gave up soft drinks as a regular thing in order to save money and also
    at the same time gave up SF magazine subscription which I formerly had
    to all the major magazines plus I bought English magazines off the news
    stand and all that was given up to save money.
    ˙˙˙˙Now last year in the Autumn I broke my ankle and did not know
    that until in December when I saw a Orthopedic surgeon and saw
    the X-rays.˙ On January 24th my surgery was done to fuse the ankle
    and I was in the hospital from then until April 11th.

    ˙˙˙˙The charge for a month in the Rehab facility was around $28,000
    per month. The money was not going to the Nurses who took care of
    a variety of patients but to the cost of a building in Downtown San
    Francisco where it was situated about 4 blocks up and downhill
    from my apartment where i have lived for the last 50+ years.


    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in very
    good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the USA.

    ˙˙˙˙How about Norway, Denmark and Sweden, Gemany and France, Japan
    and India. China of course is its own case. Taiwan is doing well though we are not supposed to consider it a nation.


    The coming Codominion may shake things up though.

    ˙˙˙˙???>
    Lynn

    ˙˙˙˙I perfer to imagine the advent of Renee Schaeffer's Concensus.
    In the near future I will post my review of her work "Ageless".

    ˙˙˙˙bliss

    All of those countries are in debt up to their eyeballs, just like US.
    Some more, some less.

    The Codominion was invented by Jerry Pournelle and envisioned a future
    when Russia and the USA became allies by agreement. The combined two
    allies rule Earth and the interstellar colonies.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoDominium

    Lynn


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Lurndal@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 23 23:44:13 2025
    Reply-To: slp53@pacbell.net

    Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> writes:


    On 7/22/25 19:45, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.


    Lynn

    The tax cuts for the very well off and the very well off caused those
    defictis
    and those happened in the Term of #45 a bigly foolish man called Trump.

    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    Clinton then reduced the deficit to basically zero (balancing the
    budget).

    Then GWB again cut taxes without reducing spending, ballooning the deficit
    and the corresponding debt load (not to mention the yuge spending on the
    middle east wars he started).

    Then Obama again reduced the deficit.

    Then Trump blew it up again. Biden attempted to remedy that,
    and then the orange clown show really got started and here we are,
    with an additional $4 trillion of debt.

    So, Lynn, you really need to work on your history and math skills
    and stop reading the idiot websites you keep citing.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: UsenetServer - www.usenetserver.com (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 00:48:27 2025
    On 7/23/2025 6:44 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> writes:


    On 7/22/25 19:45, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.


    Lynn

    The tax cuts for the very well off and the very well off caused those >> defictis
    and those happened in the Term of #45 a bigly foolish man called Trump.

    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    Clinton then reduced the deficit to basically zero (balancing the
    budget).

    Then GWB again cut taxes without reducing spending, ballooning the deficit and the corresponding debt load (not to mention the yuge spending on the middle east wars he started).

    Then Obama again reduced the deficit.

    Then Trump blew it up again. Biden attempted to remedy that,
    and then the orange clown show really got started and here we are,
    with an additional $4 trillion of debt.

    So, Lynn, you really need to work on your history and math skills
    and stop reading the idiot websites you keep citing.

    Plus the Administration's on-again-off-again tariffs, US withdrawals
    from international agencies, discontinuing international aid so millions
    will starve or die of preventable illnesses and general xenophobia over
    the last six months.

    --
    I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
    dirty old man.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 05:01:00 2025
    On 7/23/2025 8:38 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Nonsense. Support your assertion with the relevent research citations.

    Your TDS is getting stronger. I suggest seeing a psychiatrist about it.

    Lynn



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Cryptoengineer@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 06:34:22 2025
    On 7/23/2025 3:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 8:38 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Nonsense.˙ Support your assertion with the relevent research citations.

    Your TDS is getting stronger.˙ I suggest seeing a psychiatrist about it.

    Lynn

    I hate when people won't cite actual numbers.

    From:
    https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/us-debt-by-president.html

    Name Dates debt at end Increase Percentage increase

    Clinton 1993-2001 $5.81 T $1.40 T 31.64%
    George W. Bush 2001-2009 $11.91 T $6.10 T 105.08% - over 2 terms
    Barack Obama 2009-2017 $20.24 T $8.34 T 69.98% - over 2 terms
    Trump 1 2017-2021 $28.43 T $8.18 T 40.43%
    Biden 2021-2025 $34.60 T $6.17 T 21.71%

    I'd like to point out that both Trump 1 and Biden had to deal with the
    Covid epidemic, when 3-4 trillion dollars that were conjured out of
    thin air to keep businesses afloat, employees paid, and people whose
    jobs shut down with a roof over their heads and food on their plates.

    That 3-4 trillion was money well spent, and spread the burden over the
    entire population in the form of later inflation. Sometimes you have to
    take on debt to get through hard times.

    pt



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 07:30:20 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/23/25 13:34, Cryptoengineer wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 3:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 8:38 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar >>>>> because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Nonsense.˙ Support your assertion with the relevent research citations.

    Your TDS is getting stronger.˙ I suggest seeing a psychiatrist about it.

    Lynn

    I hate when people won't cite actual numbers.

    From:
    https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/us-debt-by-president.html

    Name˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ Dates˙˙˙˙ debt at end˙˙ Increase˙ Percentage increase

    Clinton˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ 1993-2001˙˙ $5.81 T˙˙˙˙ $1.40 T˙˙ 31.64%
    George W. Bush˙ 2001-2009˙ $11.91 T˙˙˙˙ $6.10 T˙ 105.08% - over 2 terms Barack Obama˙˙˙ 2009-2017˙ $20.24 T˙˙˙˙ $8.34 T˙˙ 69.98% - over 2 terms
    Trump 1˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ 2017-2021˙ $28.43 T˙˙˙˙ $8.18 T˙˙ 40.43%
    Biden˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ 2021-2025˙ $34.60 T˙˙˙˙ $6.17 T˙˙ 21.71%

    I'd like to point out that both Trump 1 and Biden had to deal with the
    Covid epidemic, when 3-4 trillion dollars that were conjured out of
    thin air to keep businesses afloat, employees paid, and people whose
    jobs shut down with a roof over their heads and food on their plates.

    That 3-4 trillion was money well spent, and spread the burden over the
    entire population in the form of later inflation. Sometimes you have to
    take on debt to get through hard times.

    pt



    And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well off and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I was
    in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon a year
    might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot more. The money belongs to the nation and the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a few people.

    bliss


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn McGuire@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 08:23:16 2025
    On 7/23/2025 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    ....> ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well off
    and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I was
    in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon a year might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot˙ more.˙ The money belongs to the nation and the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a few people.

    ˙˙˙˙bliss

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires in
    the USA own ?

    Lynn


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 08:50:18 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/23/25 15:23, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    ˙ ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well off
    and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I was
    in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon a
    year might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot˙ more.˙ The money belongs to the nation and
    the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a
    few people.

    ˙˙˙˙˙bliss

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires in
    the USA own ?

    Lynn


    Why not take candy from babies? It is demonstable bad for them.
    Judging by what I read about millionaires, money is bad for them but they
    have great attachments to said funds. So I propose reducing the billions
    to 100 Millions as the money sitting in their accounts amounts to
    constipation
    of the monetary system and money is only useful when it keeps moving.
    Presently money is moving only upwards away fromt the worker who create
    the value in the world. Lincoln said it well that "Labor is antecedent to Capital and the only real source of wealth". Every bit of capital was produced
    by workers who are robbed of their fair share of the profit from their
    work.

    bliss

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From William Hyde@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 09:11:45 2025
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 10:43 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:


    ˙˙˙˙˙How about Norway, Denmark and Sweden, Gemany and France, Japan
    and India. China of course is its own case. Taiwan is doing well
    though we
    are not supposed to consider it a nation.


    The coming Codominion may shake things up though.

    ˙˙˙˙˙???>
    Lynn

    ˙˙˙˙˙I perfer to imagine the advent of Renee Schaeffer's Concensus. In
    the near future I will post my review of her work "Ageless".

    ˙˙˙˙˙bliss

    All of those countries are in debt up to their eyeballs, just like US.

    "Just like the US"? Let's look at some actual numbers:


    Norway, 40% of GDP
    Denmark 31
    Sweden 34
    India 83
    Germany 62
    France 90
    Japan 250
    Taiwan 30
    US 122

    Four of these are definitely not in debt up to their eyeballs, and only
    one is worse off than the US.

    Norway's actual debt is zero, as its sovereign wealth fund far exceeds
    its debts. Taiwan's debt is actually falling.

    William Hyde

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 10:39:23 2025
    On 7/23/2025 12:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 8:38 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:


    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Nonsense.˙ Support your assertion with the relevent research citations.

    Your TDS is getting stronger.˙ I suggest seeing a psychiatrist about it.

    Translation: "I got nothing."

    --
    I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
    dirty old man.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From William Hyde@3:633/280.2 to All on Thu Jul 24 11:15:31 2025
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    ˙ ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well off
    and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I was
    in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon a
    year might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot˙ more.˙ The money belongs to the nation and
    the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a
    few people.

    ˙˙˙˙˙bliss

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires in
    the USA own ?

    Straw man much?

    Actually it was Trump who proposed in 1999 that a 15% wealth tax be
    levied on people worth at least ten million dollars, as that would have cleared the national debt at the time.

    I don't know if this declaration was made while Trump was officially
    bankrupt, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.

    William Hyde


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Dorsey@3:633/280.2 to All on Fri Jul 25 06:00:32 2025
    Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires in
    the USA own ?

    Historically, this worked very poorly for France in the 18th century, but
    it worked remarkably well for Japan after WWII.

    But, in general, this is what happens inevitably when capitalism breaks down, and if you don't make the rich pay reasonable taxes, eventually they will
    wind up having to pay unreasonable ones.
    --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Cryptoengineer@3:633/280.2 to All on Fri Jul 25 10:56:09 2025
    On 7/23/2025 6:23 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    ˙ ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well off
    and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I was
    in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon a
    year might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot˙ more.˙ The money belongs to the nation and
    the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a
    few people.

    ˙˙˙˙˙bliss

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires in
    the USA own ?

    So, you don't have a serious answer.

    The general social contract in America is that if you work hard at a job
    you should be compensated with a portion of the wealth you create.

    This was true for much of American history, but since the 1970s that
    portion has shrunk steadily - more and more of the wealth a worker
    creates goes to the employer and owners.

    Look at the chart here, which plots American worker productivity along
    with median compensation, over time:

    https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

    You can see that up until the early 70s, worker productivity and
    pay rose pretty much in lockstep. A rising tide really did lift all
    boats.

    After that point, while productivity continued to rise, real wages
    stagnated: Since 1979, productivity increased 87%, but wages only 32%.
    Workers are increasingly left out of enjoying the benefit of their
    labor.

    Do you think this is a good or a bad thing?

    I think it's a bad thing,

    As for taxing the rich, I'll note that during 50s and early 60s,
    the period many look back at as the most prosperous, the top
    marginal federal tax rate was 90% or higher (its now around 40%)

    Clearly, high taxes on the very rich didn't hurt the economy.

    So yes, I have a lot of sympathy for 'soak the rich', even as
    I profit from the BBB, and am in a pretty high bracket myself.

    pt



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 08:02:12 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/23/25 18:15, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/23/2025 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    ˙ ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ And sometimes you have to simply raise taxes on the well
    off
    and well
    compensated to balance the budget as Ike did way back there when I
    was in High School. 90% taxes on the people with over a few millilon
    a year might do a lot to
    bring the deficit down. Confiscatory taxation on the people with over
    $100 million
    in wealth might do a lot˙ more.˙ The money belongs to the nation and
    the nation
    should be able to recall it when it is trapped in the holdings of a
    few people.

    ˙˙˙˙˙bliss

    Why not just take every penny that the millionaires and billionaires
    in the USA own ?

    Straw man much?

    Actually it was Trump who proposed in 1999 that a 15% wealth tax be
    levied on people worth at least ten million dollars, as that would have cleared the national debt at the time.

    I don't know if this declaration was made while Trump was officially bankrupt, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.

    William Hyde


    Trump is likely bankrupt *OFFICIALLY* right now. Certainly Morally bankrupt speaking as some one nearly as bad. But I only lie to my
    friends and one or two other
    people at a time. Trump lied to the whole nation about the Covid-19
    virus when he
    knew hard times were at hand. Maybe the last good thing he did was to
    pay for
    the development of the vaccine which pioneered new technology that will probably
    help in the future.

    He is a serial bankrupt and was bankrup so often it might catch up with
    the felony
    business frauds 34 so far. He went bankrupt to avoid taxation. Just as
    he overvalued
    properties to creditors and undervalued them to the tax authorities. He doubled the
    size of his apartments on paper but in real life they were much smaller
    though large
    enough for his ego.

    I think he belongs in jail far from levers of power but that might enrage his
    MAGA cultists.

    Well this is great fun and I am already installing and updating a new version
    of KDE Plasma on my other machine before I attempt it on this one which
    having
    a very large display for a laptop form factor is in fact a portable work station.
    The equivalent of a old portable in suitcase form factor.
    The other machine now uses kDE 6.4.3 and I shut it down last night after
    updates and it came up the same in the morning.

    I hope Lynn gets some better input of information in the near future. The quality of what he is getting seems "faux" to me.
    `
    bliss - trapped by my computer hobby...


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Dorsey@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 08:40:04 2025
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    Well, not entirely. It started with deficit spending to support the ever-popular War In Vietnam. But then we have Reagan and Bush sr.
    promoting the idea that reducing taxes on the rich would cause them to
    invest the money they saved into businesses which would employ the
    less wealthy, and that the money given to the rich would "trickle down."

    Trickle-down economics can work if there are incentives to make it work,
    but in the Reagan and Bush era those incentives were actually eliminated. Removing inheritance taxes was a big par of breaking down the process.
    The end result of the Reagan and Bush sr. tax cuts was to make rich
    people more wealthy, not to make them invest in America.

    Clinton then reduced the deficit to basically zero (balancing the
    budget).

    This is true, and he should get a lot of credit for that.

    Then GWB again cut taxes without reducing spending, ballooning the deficit >and the corresponding debt load (not to mention the yuge spending on the >middle east wars he started).

    The Bush Jr. tax cuts were poorly though-out but in the end it turned out
    that they had a tiny impact compared with poorly-thought-out wars against undefined enemies.

    Then Obama again reduced the deficit.

    Not by very much, but by some. It is a little bit odd here isn't it that
    the Republicans, who talk such a great game about responsible spending,
    seem to always increase the deficit?

    Then Trump blew it up again. Biden attempted to remedy that,
    and then the orange clown show really got started and here we are,
    with an additional $4 trillion of debt.

    It's those crazy tax and spend Republicans again. Tax and spend, tax
    and spend, and they don't care where it's coming from.

    I suspect that the current debt is unsustainable, and I have a very
    disturbing worry that it's possible the current administration is deliberately trying to saddle the country with unsustainable debt. But they are most certainly not trying to do anything to reduce it and they are doing a lot
    to increase it.

    So, Lynn, you really need to work on your history and math skills
    and stop reading the idiot websites you keep citing.

    There was a long time when I really did want politicians who would do the fiscal job the Republicans kept saying they would do, but didn't. But now
    we have the Republicans specifically saying that debt is good and that
    they want to devalue the dollar so that American products would be more competitive abroad. It's very very confusing.
    --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 14:00:12 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/27/25 15:40, Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    I must demur. It started with JFK a rich boy wth a war record which in times
    closer to WW II insured his election. But he was a rich man and he cut
    the tax
    rates on the rich because you know the economic classes tend to hang out together
    and listen to each other.



    Well, not entirely. It started with deficit spending to support the ever-popular War In Vietnam. But then we have Reagan and Bush sr.
    promoting the idea that reducing taxes on the rich would cause them to
    invest the money they saved into businesses which would employ the
    less wealthy, and that the money given to the rich would "trickle down."

    Trickle-down economics can work if there are incentives to make it work,
    but in the Reagan and Bush era those incentives were actually eliminated. Removing inheritance taxes was a big par of breaking down the process.
    The end result of the Reagan and Bush sr. tax cuts was to make rich
    people more wealthy, not to make them invest in America.

    Clinton then reduced the deficit to basically zero (balancing the
    budget).

    This is true, and he should get a lot of credit for that.

    But seduced by the reasonable Republicans he nullified the Glass-Stegal
    act.

    Quoting from online reference
    The Glass-Steagall Act, enacted in 1933, separated commercial banking
    from investment banking to protect depositors and reduce the risk of
    financial speculation. It aimed to prevent the kind of financial
    practices that contributed to the Great Depression, but was largely
    repealed in 1999.
    /unquote

    In 2008 we saw the result of the removal of valuable regulations. The
    people who
    were helped were not the homeowners who were underwater but the financial institution that had helped put them there.


    Then GWB again cut taxes without reducing spending, ballooning the deficit >> and the corresponding debt load (not to mention the yuge spending on the
    middle east wars he started).

    The Bush Jr. tax cuts were poorly though-out but in the end it turned out that they had a tiny impact compared with poorly-thought-out wars against undefined enemies.

    Then Obama again reduced the deficit.

    Not by very much, but by some. It is a little bit odd here isn't it that
    the Republicans, who talk such a great game about responsible spending,
    seem to always increase the deficit?

    Well they hate taxation and being paid to run by rich people they have good reason to hate taxation. I think anyone who advocates against
    responsible
    taxation and responsible financial regulation is a traitorous idiot but
    that is just
    my VHO.


    Then Trump blew it up again. Biden attempted to remedy that,
    and then the orange clown show really got started and here we are,
    with an additional $4 trillion of debt.

    It's those crazy tax and spend Republicans again. Tax and spend, tax
    and spend, and they don't care where it's coming from.

    I suspect that the current debt is unsustainable, and I have a very disturbing worry that it's possible the current administration is deliberately
    trying to saddle the country with unsustainable debt. But they are most certainly not trying to do anything to reduce it and they are doing a lot
    to increase it.

    They have a saying about cutting the Federal Government down to a size where it can be drowned in a bathtub.


    So, Lynn, you really need to work on your history and math skills
    and stop reading the idiot websites you keep citing.

    There was a long time when I really did want politicians who would do the fiscal job the Republicans kept saying they would do, but didn't. But now
    we have the Republicans specifically saying that debt is good and that
    they want to devalue the dollar so that American products would be more competitive abroad. It's very very confusing.
    --scott


    It is not confusing but criminal how the Republicans are currently behaving having fallen under the spell of a financial criminal who went bankrupt ot avoid taxation and who has been found guilty of 34 Felony
    counts of defrauding the tax authorities of New York City. Not to mention sexual assault. etc.

    Likely he will die before he pays the fines he has already incurred
    or do a day in lockup.

    bliss - a cranky 87 year old who thought of Hitler when she heard Trump.



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Robert Woodward@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 15:01:54 2025
    In article <1066skc$20lg7$1@dont-email.me>,
    Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> wrote:

    On 7/27/25 15:40, Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:

    (SNIP)


    Trickle-down economics can work if there are incentives to make it work, but in the Reagan and Bush era those incentives were actually eliminated. Removing inheritance taxes was a big par of breaking down the process.
    The end result of the Reagan and Bush sr. tax cuts was to make rich
    people more wealthy, not to make them invest in America.

    Clinton then reduced the deficit to basically zero (balancing the
    budget).

    This is true, and he should get a lot of credit for that.

    But seduced by the reasonable Republicans he nullified the Glass-Stegal
    act.

    Quoting from online reference
    The Glass-Steagall Act, enacted in 1933, separated commercial banking
    from investment banking to protect depositors and reduce the risk of financial speculation. It aimed to prevent the kind of financial
    practices that contributed to the Great Depression, but was largely
    repealed in 1999.
    /unquote

    In 2008 we saw the result of the removal of valuable regulations. The
    people who
    were helped were not the homeowners who were underwater but the financial institution that had helped put them there.

    People keep citing the repeal of Glass-Steagall*, but the financial
    firms that failed were either not covered by Glass-Steagall or were
    doing what they had been doing for years under the restrictions of G-S.
    They all were taken down by the bursting of a housing bubble (IMHO, the mortgage interest deduction had a lot to do with that). For that matter,
    I believe that without Microsoft Excell, it would have been very
    difficult to create all the mortgage-based derivatives that also played
    a part.

    *If I was a conspiracy theorist, I might claim that the real purpose of Glass-Steagall was to punish the House of Morgan for being a more
    effective central bank for the USA while J. P. Morgan Sr was alive than
    the Federal Reserve was 2 decades after his death.

    --
    "We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
    Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. —-----------------------------------------------------
    Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: home user (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Dorsey@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 22:32:42 2025
    Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

    But seduced by the reasonable Republicans he nullified the Glass-Stegal
    act.

    Quoting from online reference
    The Glass-Steagall Act, enacted in 1933, separated commercial banking
    from investment banking to protect depositors and reduce the risk of >financial speculation. It aimed to prevent the kind of financial
    practices that contributed to the Great Depression, but was largely
    repealed in 1999.
    /unquote


    The idea here being that supply and demand combined with an informed buyer would fix all problems. Everybody would know how their commercial bank invested their savings and therefore would avoid banks that had risky investment practices.

    The problem is that first of all the banks' investment practices are buried
    at the bottom of page 139 in the annual report, and it's difficult for potential customers to actually know where their money is going, and secondly due to bank consolidation many people have little or no choice for their
    bank if they want particular services.

    An argument could be made that eliminating Glass-Steagall might have been
    a good thing had it not been for the ludicrous consolidation of banks that
    took place beginning in the nineties and continuing to today.

    In 2008 we saw the result of the removal of valuable regulations. The
    people who
    were helped were not the homeowners who were underwater but the financial >institution that had helped put them there.

    This was really, really bad, and we have yet to see the worst of the fallout from it.
    --scott


    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Dorsey@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Jul 28 22:39:40 2025
    Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

    People keep citing the repeal of Glass-Steagall*, but the financial
    firms that failed were either not covered by Glass-Steagall or were
    doing what they had been doing for years under the restrictions of G-S.

    Yes, we are talking about two unrelated financial disasters here. The
    repeal of Glass-Steagall has not yet turned int a complete disaster but
    it is likely to in the future.

    They all were taken down by the bursting of a housing bubble (IMHO, the >mortgage interest deduction had a lot to do with that). For that matter,
    I believe that without Microsoft Excell, it would have been very
    difficult to create all the mortgage-based derivatives that also played
    a part.

    Yes, this is all true but I don't think that is the argument being proposed here. The housing bubble burst; people put their money into investments that they didn't really understand. These things happen.

    The problem discussed here isn't the disaster itself, but the bailout.
    Bailing out investment bankers and not homeowners does not fix anything
    and makes investment bankers more likely to take similar risks in the
    future.

    *If I was a conspiracy theorist, I might claim that the real purpose of >Glass-Steagall was to punish the House of Morgan for being a more
    effective central bank for the USA while J. P. Morgan Sr was alive than
    the Federal Reserve was 2 decades after his death.

    The Morgans of today are not the Morgan of JP's era, sadly.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 00:33:00 2025
    On 7/27/2025 3:02 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

    ˙˙˙˙I hope Lynn gets some better input of information in the near future. The quality of what he is getting seems "faux" to me.
    `
    Lynn's blindness is willful and deliberate.

    --
    I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
    dirty old man.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Paul S Person@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 01:58:30 2025
    On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 18:40:04 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
    Dorsey) wrote:

    <snippo interesting review of deficits over history (well, from the
    '60s anyway)>

    It's those crazy tax and spend Republicans again. Tax and spend, tax
    and spend, and they don't care where it's coming from.

    Ah, humor. It is the Dems who are "tax and spend". The Republicans
    used to be Fiscally Conservative but have been "spend and spend" for
    quite some time now.

    Clinton stands out because he was the /last/ Fiscally Conservative
    President. Of course, he had a Republican-controlled Congress to deal
    with, which didn't help.

    Bush2's tax cut didn't matter because he used Bill Clinton's surplus
    to pay for it. Hey, that's better than just charging it to the
    National Debt, the current Republican practice.

    I suspect that the current debt is unsustainable, and I have a very=20 >disturbing worry that it's possible the current administration is = deliberately
    trying to saddle the country with unsustainable debt. But they are most >certainly not trying to do anything to reduce it and they are doing a =
    lot
    to increase it.

    It was clear (and, IIRC, explicit) that Reagan wanted to destroy
    Social Security. And /that's/ why the Republicans have no problem with
    the National Debt: it is a weapon for them to use to destroy Social
    Security.

    After all, most Social Security reciptients are /not/ 1%-ers. And we
    all know that Republicans believe that /all money belongs to the
    1%-ers, and to nobody else/.=20

    Once one realizes that, one is no longer confused or suprised by
    anything they do.
    --=20
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From William Hyde@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 08:06:54 2025
    Bobbie Sellers wrote:


    On 7/27/25 15:40, Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    ˙˙˙˙I must demur. It started with JFK a rich boy wth a war record which
    in times
    closer to WW II insured his election.˙ But he was a rich man and he cut
    the tax
    rates on the rich because you know the economic classes tend to hang out together
    and listen to each other.


    Fan as I am of taxing the rich, even I think that 90% top marginal rates
    are unproductive.

    JFK's tax cut was designed to increase revenue by stimulating the
    economy. Yes, I know that's the excuse we've heard since Reagan, but
    what is false at a top rate of circa 40% may be true at 90%.

    There was strong opposition to the cut from republicans. For in those
    distant times the gop actually stood for balanced budgets, or something
    close to it, and they did not believe, then, in the "cut tax grow
    economy" mantra they now espouse.

    LBJ, as president, had to cut spending seriously before the republicans
    would let the cuts pass in the senate. The economy expanded after the
    cuts, and tax revenues rose, but whether that was due to them or a coincidence, I do not know. One can certainly argue that after a mild recession in the early 60s the postwar economy was due a rebound anyway.

    The cuts could also have benefited LBJ, who was much, much, richer than
    he claimed to be. But he was also very good at avoiding taxes, so it's
    not clear.

    William Hyde

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 08:52:23 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/28/25 15:06, William Hyde wrote:
    Bobbie Sellers wrote:


    On 7/27/25 15:40, Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).

    ˙˙˙˙˙I must demur. It started with JFK a rich boy wth a war record
    which in times
    closer to WW II insured his election.˙ But he was a rich man and he
    cut the tax
    rates on the rich because you know the economic classes tend to hang
    out together
    and listen to each other.


    Fan as I am of taxing the rich, even I think that 90% top marginal rates
    are unproductive.

    Dwight David Eisenhower did not notice any economic downturn but of course
    he was building infrastructure with the money. We all used it earlier
    before we became
    aware that burning gasoline and other fossil fuels was not a good
    solution.>
    JFK's tax cut was designed to increase revenue by stimulating the
    economy. Yes, I know that's the excuse we've heard since Reagan, but
    what is false at a top rate of circa 40% may be true at 90%.

    There was strong opposition to the cut from republicans.˙ For in those distant times the gop actually stood for balanced budgets, or something close to it, and they did not believe, then, in˙ the "cut tax grow
    economy" mantra they now espouse.

    LBJ, as president, had to cut spending seriously before the republicans would let the cuts pass in the senate.˙ The economy expanded after the
    cuts, and tax revenues rose, but whether that was due to them or a coincidence, I do not know.˙ One can certainly argue that after a mild recession in the early 60s the postwar economy was due a rebound anyway.

    The Republicans of those distant years were actually economic conservatives
    as well as being afraid of dictatorship by popular leaders. Too bad
    they gave it up.


    The cuts could also have benefited LBJ, who was much, much, richer than
    he claimed to be.˙ But he was also very good at avoiding taxes, so it's
    not clear.

    William Hyde

    bliss


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Chris Thompson@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 12:17:55 2025
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of its >>>>>>> value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per >>>>>>> gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity.
    Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up
    including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left
    the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to >>>>>> hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the deficit >>>>> is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive as
    Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife and
    I are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in
    very good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of the >>>>> USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about
    65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120,
    Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" I
    do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly France
    also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast.

    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many countries
    are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or their
    requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our
    indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now
    and in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits
    in the trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Lynn



    The deficits generated by Biden are dwarfed by those that are coming
    from Trump's insane tax cuts. In addition, the CHIPS Act and the
    Inflation Reduction Act generated deficits in order to put people to
    work. They'd have good jobs and would pay taxes in the future. That tax revenue was projected to pay off quite a bit of the deficits- making
    them an investment in the future. (Not anymore- quite a few of those
    factories and such have been closed because the government cut off the
    money.) OTOH the current tax cuts don't do anything for the economy.
    They line the pockets of people who already have obscene amounts of
    disposable cash.

    Chris


    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 14:20:02 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/28/25 19:17, Chris Thompson wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of >>>>>>>> its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per >>>>>>>> gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity. >>>>>>>> Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up
    including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left >>>>>>>> the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to >>>>>>> hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's
    wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to
    make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent
    future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the
    deficit is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very expensive >>>>>> as Medicare and Social Security costs are rising rapidly (My wife >>>>>> and I are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in
    very good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of
    the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany about >>>>> 65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both about 120,
    Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US"
    I do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly
    France also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast. >>>>>
    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many countries
    are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their stability or
    their requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in our
    indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level now
    and in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual deficits
    in the trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US Dollar
    because of the current federal Administrations attempts at policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Lynn



    The deficits generated by Biden are dwarfed by those that are coming
    from Trump's insane tax cuts. In addition, the CHIPS Act and the
    Inflation Reduction Act generated deficits in order to put people to
    work. They'd have good jobs and would pay taxes in the future. That tax revenue was projected to pay off quite a bit of the deficits- making
    them an investment in the future. (Not anymore- quite a few of those factories and such have been closed because the government cut off the money.) OTOH the current tax cuts don't do anything for the economy.
    They line the pockets of people who already have obscene amounts of disposable cash.

    Chris


    Whether it is disposable or not the wealth the billionaires have
    taken control of is not doing them or other people aside from Yacht builders,
    caviar packers and champagne bottlers any good. They have plenty of
    cash/credit available to over-indulge in things that are very bad for
    them. People with a fraction of those sums have died of drugs and
    high living.
    So since we love such rich folks it would be our duty to save them
    from the dangers of being very very rich. So I stick with conficatory
    wealth taxation as the solution to our problems of govenment finance.
    Who needs more than $100,000,000 in this day and age.

    So that brings up the problem of tax breaks. How about the
    portion of that immense wealth that is invested in Federal tax free
    bonds count against the total of the Taxes they would pay and
    a discount for every employee who has a salary commensurate with
    the individual total income of the wealthy owners and security income
    counts as well...
    Eisenhower got the money from the rich to build the Interstate
    Highway System and it contributed to the wealth and pleasure of
    of a very large proportion of the population of the USA. All the
    millionaires from an earlier era drove the most expensive vehicles
    such as Cadillacs and Lincolns. If they were really discerning and
    filthy rich a Rolls Royce chariot with chauffeur was at their beck
    and call.
    Pity the rich. They have only the most expensive toys.

    bliss - be careful how seriously you take me, a pauper.



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Robert Woodward@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 14:59:50 2025
    In article <1067r2c$96f$1@panix2.panix.com>,
    kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

    Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

    (snip Re: 2008 Financial Crisis)

    Yes, this is all true but I don't think that is the argument being proposed here. The housing bubble burst; people put their money into investments that they didn't really understand. These things happen.

    The problem discussed here isn't the disaster itself, but the bailout. Bailing out investment bankers and not homeowners does not fix anything
    and makes investment bankers more likely to take similar risks in the
    future.

    Investment banks were bailed out? Lehman Brothers is GONE, so is Bear
    Stearns.

    --
    "We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
    Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. ‹-----------------------------------------------------
    Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: home user (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 15:07:29 2025
    Reply-To: blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com



    On 7/28/25 21:59, Robert Woodward wrote:
    In article <1067r2c$96f$1@panix2.panix.com>,
    kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

    Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

    (snip Re: 2008 Financial Crisis)

    Yes, this is all true but I don't think that is the argument being proposed >> here. The housing bubble burst; people put their money into investments that
    they didn't really understand. These things happen.

    The problem discussed here isn't the disaster itself, but the bailout.
    Bailing out investment bankers and not homeowners does not fix anything
    and makes investment bankers more likely to take similar risks in the
    future.

    Investment banks were bailed out? Lehman Brothers is GONE, so is Bear Stearns.

    Are the CEOs begging on the Street or unhoused?
    I think not.
    A very large proportion of the various institutions and the operators thereof profited by the circumstances. They always seem to make
    money or at least increase their capital holding in such situations.
    It goes along with the truism that you must have money to
    make more money, unless you are the government.

    bliss



    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: dis (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Dorsey@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Jul 29 21:47:47 2025
    Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

    Investment banks were bailed out? Lehman Brothers is GONE, so is Bear >Stearns.

    Lehman Brothers is gone, indeed. But Bear Stearns was taken over by JPMorgan, which itself had received a bailout. AIG got one hell of a bailout, as
    did Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch. (Merrill Lynch got taken over by
    BoA which was traditionally a commercial bank.... and it got taken over using bailout funds).

    In the end the only really big one that was allowed to collapse was Lehman,
    I think.

    The funds were almost entirely repaid, which is a sign that the bailout mostly worked, though. But the 2008 disaster didn't change banks' behaviour much. --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 30 00:33:55 2025
    On 7/28/2025 9:20 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:


    On 7/28/25 19:17, Chris Thompson wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 7:51 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 4:01 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/22/2025 5:12 PM, William Hyde wrote:
    Lynn McGuire wrote:
    On 7/21/2025 11:35 PM, John Savard wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 17:55:16 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

    In the not so distant future, the USA Dollar has lost most of >>>>>>>>> its value
    and annual inflation is running 20% per year.˙ Gasoline is $60 per >>>>>>>>> gallon and rationed at 10 gallons per week, so is electricity. >>>>>>>>> Food and
    housing are comparatively expensive.˙ The taxes have gone up >>>>>>>>> including
    new personal healthcare taxes and such.˙ Many people have left >>>>>>>>> the USA
    looking for cheaper places to live.

    Financial collapse is perhaps the last disaster I would imagine to >>>>>>>> hit the United States first and harder than anywhere else.

    But precisely because the United States seems to be the world's >>>>>>>> wealthiest nation, I suppose that overconfidence can lead it to >>>>>>>> make mistakes.

    John Savard

    I think that financial collapse of the USA is the most prevalent >>>>>>> future. ˙˙The USA is deficit spending at 30% to 40% and the
    deficit is increasing.˙ Keeping old people alive is very
    expensive as Medicare and Social Security costs are rising
    rapidly (My wife and I are the beneficiary of both).

    However, I do not know of any other country on Earth that is in >>>>>>> very good financial shape with even 1/10th of the population of >>>>>>> the USA.

    The national debt of south Korea is about 40% of GDP, Germany
    about 65, France 90, the UK 100.˙ Canada and˙ the US are both
    about 120, Japan near 250.

    Where you draw the line of "in very good shape compared to the US" >>>>>> I do not know, but the first two should qualify, and possibly
    France also.

    Canada would have qualified pre-Covid.˙ Things can go downhill fast. >>>>>>
    William Hyde

    The USA Dollar is the reserve currency of the Earth.˙ Many
    countries are holding billions of Dollars as a part of their
    stability or their requirements as a protectorate of the USA, such
    as Japan, etc.

    That allows the USA to wildly abuse the the rest of the world in
    our indebtedness.˙ But, the USA is testing that indebtedness level
    now and in the future as it rapidly increases with huge annual
    deficits in the trillions of dollars.

    Many countries are already moving away from reliance on the US
    Dollar because of the current federal Administrations attempts at
    policy.

    Most of that, if not all, was started during the Biden administration
    due to the huge deficits.

    Lynn



    The deficits generated by Biden are dwarfed by those that are coming
    from Trump's insane tax cuts. In addition, the CHIPS Act and the
    Inflation Reduction Act generated deficits in order to put people to
    work. They'd have good jobs and would pay taxes in the future. That
    tax revenue was projected to pay off quite a bit of the deficits-
    making them an investment in the future. (Not anymore- quite a few of
    those factories and such have been closed because the government cut
    off the money.) OTOH the current tax cuts don't do anything for the
    economy. They line the pockets of people who already have obscene
    amounts of disposable cash.

    Chris


    ˙˙˙˙Whether it is disposable or not the wealth the billionaires have
    ˙taken control of is not doing them or other people aside from Yacht builders,
    ˙caviar packers and champagne bottlers any good. They have plenty of
    ˙cash/credit available to over-indulge in things that are very bad for
    ˙them.˙ People with a fraction of those sums have died˙ of drugs and
    high living.
    ˙˙˙˙So since we love such rich folks it would be our duty to save them
    from the dangers of being very very rich.˙ So I stick with conficatory
    wealth taxation as the solution to our problems of govenment finance.
    Who needs more than $100,000,000 in this day and age.

    ˙˙˙˙So that brings up the problem of tax breaks. How about the
    portion of that immense wealth that is invested in Federal tax free
    bonds count against the total of the Taxes they would pay and
    a discount for every employee who has a salary commensurate with
    the individual total income of the wealthy owners and security income
    counts as well...
    ˙˙˙˙Eisenhower got the money from the rich to build the Interstate
    Highway System and it contributed to the wealth and pleasure of
    of a very large proportion of the population of the USA. All the
    millionaires from an earlier era drove the most expensive vehicles
    such as Cadillacs and Lincolns.˙ If they were really discerning and
    filthy rich a Rolls Royce chariot with chauffeur was at their beck
    and call.
    ˙˙˙˙Pity the rich. They have only the most expensive toys.

    ˙˙˙˙bliss - be careful how seriously you take me, a pauper.

    Almost all of the increased concentration of wealth in the US over the
    last few decades has ended up in just 19 families.

    --
    I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
    dirty old man.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Paul S Person@3:633/280.2 to All on Wed Jul 30 01:05:28 2025
    On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 18:06:54 -0400, William Hyde
    <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

    Bobbie Sellers wrote:
    =20
    =20
    On 7/27/25 15:40, Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
    It started with Ronald Regan and GHWB (although even RR raised taxes
    every year after his first when his advisors realized that the tax
    cuts without corresponding spending reductions wasn't real smart).
    =20
    =A0=A0=A0=A0I must demur. It started with JFK a rich boy wth a war =
    record which=20
    in times
    closer to WW II insured his election.=A0 But he was a rich man and he = cut=20
    the tax
    rates on the rich because you know the economic classes tend to hang = out=20
    together
    and listen to each other.


    Fan as I am of taxing the rich, even I think that 90% top marginal rates=
    =20
    are unproductive.

    IIRC, something like that helped to retire the debt from winning WWII.

    But those were back when the Adult in the Oval Office was /not/ a
    visiting head-of-state.

    JFK's tax cut was designed to increase revenue by stimulating the=20
    economy. Yes, I know that's the excuse we've heard since Reagan, but=20
    what is false at a top rate of circa 40% may be true at 90%.

    There was strong opposition to the cut from republicans. For in those=20 >distant times the gop actually stood for balanced budgets, or something=20 >close to it, and they did not believe, then, in the "cut tax grow=20 >economy" mantra they now espouse.

    LBJ, as president, had to cut spending seriously before the republicans=20 >would let the cuts pass in the senate. The economy expanded after the=20 >cuts, and tax revenues rose, but whether that was due to them or a=20 >coincidence, I do not know. One can certainly argue that after a mild=20 >recession in the early 60s the postwar economy was due a rebound anyway.

    The cuts could also have benefited LBJ, who was much, much, richer than=20
    he claimed to be. But he was also very good at avoiding taxes, so it's=20 >not clear.
    --=20
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- MBSE BBS v1.1.1 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)