Jump to content
I would bet the Steamboat Ski Corporation did not make the call to raise ticket prices. I'd bet that Intrawest was told by Fortress to raise revenue. Intrawest - Bill Jensen - told the Ski Corp to raise window prices and put significant capital projects (like expanding Four Points) on hold.
I took my first macro course from Merton Miller. I taught economics at the graduate level at a major university. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123258618204604599.html is an article by Robert Baro on multipliers.
Get a grip.
Mr. Tucker, Keynes didn't publish the General Theory until 1936, true, but you must be aware of the immense ammount of material he published prior to that date. You should start with "The End of Laissez-Faire" he published after his return from the Soviet Union in 1926. Hoover was making the first pithy attempts at deficit spending and was excoriated by both Republicans and Democrats prior to the election. Keynes' wonderful "The Consequences of the Peace" put him on the map, but most modern historians think his conclusions wrong. Germany could have lived with the reparations but Helmut Schacht creatively set up what became the Third Reich. We could debate the tragic loss of Benjamin Strong in 1928 and the consequence to Fed policy NYC vis-a-vis DC, but for what result? I bring up Kennedy's policy only to hit at Say's Law, supply creates its own demand. What do you think the multiplier of government spending to be? I'm with Barro who thinks it well under 1.0. I have the education and experience to qualify as an expert in this area. Do you?
Mr. Tucker, you forgot that one of FDR's planks in his first presidential campaign was a balanced budget. Mr. Hoover was the original Keynesian. You might recall JFK's marginal tax rate reduction to stimulate the 1964 economy and the Republican foolish response with an interest equalization tax. Perhaps you should read a little history yourself.
Didn't any of you attend Paul Volker's presentation last year? None of you seem to realize that, since the end of WWII, marginal tax rates have ranged from 70% to 28% and yet, in periods when the economy was in recovery, tax receipts as a percent of GDP averaged a little over 18%. You Democrats seem to have forgotten JFK's cut of marginal tax rates (and you Republicans seem to have forgotten the Interest Equalization Tax that Republicans demanded because of the (mistaken) belief that tax revenue would decline). NamVet, do you realize the recession, according to the NBER, ended in June of '09? That's two years ago! This is the worst recovery in the last 100 years! You raise marginal tax rates on the wealthy and they will change their behavior. Half the people who filed returns in 2010 paid no income tax. Whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Anarchist, Socialist, wherever you come from, the current tax structure, no matter where you put marginal rates, is not going to cover expenditures. A VAT is in the cards and the fight over how to protect the poor from that distinctively regressive tax will tear this country apart.
To all. Our political representatives have done a terrible job on educating us. Specifically, the top 1% of tax payers paid 38.02% of all revenues received in 2008; The top 5% paid 58.72%; The top 10% paid 69.94%. The top 25% paid 86.34%. The top 50% paid 97.30%. That top 1% had incomes of ~380k, the top 5% ~160k, the top 10% ~114k, the top 25% ~67k, the top 50% ~33k. Even if we took ALL the money from the top 10% of tax payers we still would not come close to balancing anything. Huey Long expressed our tax policy years ago: "Don't tax me, don't tax thee. Tax the man behind the tree." We either REALLY tax the middle class - because that's where the money is - or we REALLY cut a lot of spending. Or we REALLY do a lot of both. Using 2008 data, if we took everything over 100k from people who earned that much, we would generate ~1.5 trillion dollars. That isn't one year's deficit. You, me and all of our friends simply have to pay a lot more money to the feds. Or do a lot of cutting.
A little more... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-murder-for-hire-1024-20101023,0,7218008.story
http://triblocal.com/libertyville/2010/10/22/update-nephew-defends-businessman-accused-in-murder-for-hire-plot/ He seems to be a popular guy.
Polish sausage, I should have said that seeuski did not connect Obama, directly, with tax increases. He did state that socialism leads to higher taxes. My taxes have not increased since Obama took over.
Your argument that the Bush tax cuts were not permanent and, after expiration, not a tax increase, is pure sophistry.
Regarding Scott Wedel's comments - I've read most everything that Scott Ford has written on the local economy. Scott believes that the Steamboat economy has sufficient diversification so that it is no longer apropos to say the local economy is based solely on tourism. He believes that telecommuters will have a significant impact on the local economy going forward. Maybe. As one local telecommuter remarked to me last year, Steamboat creates jobs for 'maids and trades'. Certainly that's what sorts of jobs tourism promotes. Those jobs don't provide the incomes to buy much of anything in Steamboat and its environs, even given the modest fall in prices that we've seen, so far.
Seeuski mentioned nothing about taxes in his post. We will see what happens when the Bush tax cuts expire next year. What is worrisome... the deficity expansion under Bush and dramatically increased under Obama. A good read - "The Price of Liberty" by Robert Hormats - discusses how unique financing Iraq and Afghanistan has been. On the social welfare front, looming cost increases in medicare and social security along with recent expansion of the 'safety net', and the horrific problem of FNMA and FHLMC in conservatorship owning over 95% of current mortgage production will force some interesting choices in DC. We still haven't touched the potential problem with foreign ownership of so much US debt.
The "proven actions" - lowering the funds rate, extending unemployment benefits, not increasing taxes, increasing government spending on infrastructure - have certainly been tried. They are not working very well.
The tradional 'First World' nations have a real big problem.
Last login: Friday, February 17, 2012
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |