Are we our own worst enemy?

How about spending less on paper work:

"Shocker: Americans Produce More Regulatory Compliance Paperwork than  Manufactured Goods

Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/shocker-americans-produce-more-regulatory-compliance-paperwork-than-manufactured-goods?f=must_reads#ixzz21QguWHUI
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution"

@cbae: Would some sort of 'stagnant cash' tax motivate or cause more harm than good?

Cash is like blood. Let it congeal and clot and the circulation stop and, well, that's bad.

1 day ago, JoshRoss wrote

It's not like all that money is in some type of Scrooge McDuck room, where Bill Gates, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg, and the corpse of Steve Jobs spend their evenings swimming in a pool of currency. Most of these folks are actively seeking to throw their money at fools like us, who have started some company that might offer-- once acquired-- the slightest competitive advantage against one of their competitors.

-Josh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMyk7MXsseg

The labor force changes. When cars became popular, a lot of people's horse and carriage jobs went away. When the computers became popular, the teletype repairman jobs went away.

The labor force will adapt. It just takes some time. The same thing would happen with a communist economy as it does with a capitalist economy.

7 hours ago, Proton2 wrote

How about spending less on paper work:

"Shocker: Americans Produce More Regulatory Compliance Paperwork than  Manufactured Goods

Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/shocker-americans-produce-more-regulatory-compliance-paperwork-than-manufactured-goods?f=must_reads#ixzz21QguWHUI
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution"

Do you just belch out right-wing, anti-government propaganda uncontrollably whether it's related to the topic or not? Do you really think that if we eliminated regulations that it will magically reduce the cash pile that Microsoft, Apple, and Google have accumulated and spread it out to more companies?

1 hour ago, spivonious wrote

*snip*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMyk7MXsseg

 

The labor force changes. When cars became popular, a lot of people's horse and carriage jobs went away. When the computers became popular, the teletype repairman jobs went away.

The labor force will adapt. It just takes some time. The same thing would happen with a communist economy as it does with a capitalist economy.

I don't think that will be the case at all. We're not witnessing a sea change where one type of manufacturing takes over another. We're seeing automation take over all sectors, even in the service sector, which the US has relied on over the past 20, 30 years as it's lost manufacturing jobs overseas.

The thing is we're not losing jobs overseas simply because the labor in Asia is cheaper. Asian companies have superior technologies too. Many Asian companies have automation technologies that make most US manufacturers look like they're using 19th century hand tools.

@cbae: If Asian companies have more advanced automation, then we should buy those solutions and put them in U.S. factories.

22 minutes ago, spivonious wrote

@cbae: If Asian companies have more advanced automation, then we should buy those solutions and put them in U.S. factories.

That doesn't really the solve the problem of humans being replaced by machines. Sure, we may be able to pay a few American workers to push the buttons instead of having Chinese workers push the buttons, but that only delays the inevitable.

@cbae: Someone needs to operate the machines, someone needs to maintain the machines, someone needs to program the machines, someone needs to design the machines, someone needs to sell the machines, someone needs to build the machines, someone needs to transport the machines, etc.

@spivonious:

Well, if you watched AI, you forget one of the biggest industry, recycling.

23 hours ago, spivonious wrote

@cbae: Someone needs to operate the machines, someone needs to maintain the machines, someone needs to program the machines, someone needs to design the machines, someone needs to sell the machines, someone needs to build the machines, someone needs to transport the machines, etc.

Simples: Machine operating machines, machine programming machines, machine designing machines, machine selling machines, machine building machines, machine transporting machines etc etc

@GoddersUK:

let's hope we don't turn into batteries.

@GoddersUK: Ha, well in that case money becomes worthless and we all live in a Star Trek world.

@cbae: How is pointing out that US businesses spend 1.8 trillion dollars a year on regulatory paper work right-wing propaganda? And its topical because we are essentially talking about the economy.

I'm not at a keyboard most of the day so I can't write much of what I know on your main concerns but I post topical links as I come across them. I'll get to a keyboard tonight and we can have a really good discussion on the many flaws in your posts.

$200 billion in cash?

I don't believe that for one bit!

Where do they store it? Fort Knox? In gold?

They have the option to withdraw $200 billion from their banks. But they can't withdraw that kind of money, because the banks don't have that kind of cash.

It's the same with all of us. We have trillions of credit, but if we go and get the actual money, the bank will go bust.

It's all tied up in investments and other products, so to say that you want to give $200 billion to the poor, you first have to take the $200 billion out of the economy.

And by the way, that $200 billion is creating jobs for everybody,.

And to answer the question of the thread;

Yes, we are our own worst enemy.

Which you demonstrated perfectly in the first post of this thread. You want to use force to extract money from somebody and then spend it on somebody else who has not done anything to deserve it other then being poor.

This is the exactly the reason we are in a crisis.

8 hours ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

And to answer the question of the thread;

Yes, we are our own worst enemy.

Which you demonstrated perfectly in the first post of this thread. You want to use force to extract money from somebody and then spend it on somebody else who has not done anything to deserve it other then being poor.

This is the exactly the reason we are in a crisis.

You completely missed the point as expected. This is not about "using force to extract money" from somebody. It's about how we can prevent somebody from getting so much money in the first place. The game is rigged. We need to fix the rules. If we can't fix the rules, then we should tax the living * out of these companies.

And quit with the "use force" rhetoric. It's getting so tired even by your standards, and considering how much money corporations hide from the tax collector, it's obvious there's no force being used. Paying taxes is voluntary. Sure, you can get your * thrown in federal prison for tax evasion, but it's completely your choice to pay or not.

8 hours ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

$200 billion in cash?

I don't believe that for one bit!

Where do they store it? Fort Knox? In gold?

They have the option to withdraw $200 billion from their banks. But they can't withdraw that kind of money, because the banks don't have that kind of cash.

It's the same with all of us. We have trillions of credit, but if we go and get the actual money, the bank will go bust.

It's all tied up in investments and other products, so to say that you want to give $200 billion to the poor, you first have to take the $200 billion out of the economy.

And by the way, that $200 billion is creating jobs for everybody,.

OMG. You really I thought I meant literal cash like in paper currency? LOL

Seriously, learn something about business before you talk about business.

When companies list "cash" on the balance sheet, it can't be in any kind of securities. It has to be in cash or "cash equivalents" like bank account balance, CDs, and savings bonds. It IS NOT being invested by the company AT ALL.

The banks themselves can invest some of that money for their own benefit. They are required by law to keep a portion of bank balances in cash. They can keep the cash themselves or send it to the Federal Reserve.

Another portion of the cash can be put into very liquid (and therefore low-risk) securities like T-bills. These are very short-term investments and are essentially as liquid as real cash. This amount doesn't even show up as separate balance sheet item in the bank's books. It's essentially treated as "cash" as well. A portion of the yield from these secondary reserves as well as the interest from the primary reserves paid by the Fed can be paid back to the company in the form of interest. 

The rest can be used for loans, but we all know that banks are lending hardly anything these days.

So yes, these 3 companies have stockpiled $200 billion in cash. This is not phony money like market capital. It's cold hard cash that their customers have paid them and the companies are essentially sitting on that money collecting interest.

And that interest is pretty much coming straight from the government from the yield on T-Bills and government-issued bonds that the banks purchase from the secondary reserves. Corporations do everything they can to fleece the government by hiding away money in offshore accounts, and the money that they do report earns interest from the government. Talk about double dipping.

@cbae:

I thought he makes it quite clear. Liquid assets are fake until you have that under your pillow in Gold.