PeakTrader.com Forum Index PeakTrader.com
Economics, Portfolio Optimization, and Technical Analysis
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Log inFast Charts

ND Production & Taxes-Friedman-Falling LFPR

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     PeakTrader.com Forum Index -> Articles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
administrator
Site Admin


Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 12651

PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: ND Production & Taxes-Friedman-Falling LFPR Reply with quote

PeakTrader said...

North Dakota adds value to the country through production and taxes:

States with Lowest Unemployment Rates - March 2012

1 NORTH DAKOTA 3.0
2 NEBRASKA 4.0
3 SOUTH DAKOTA 4.3
4 VERMONT 4.8
5 IOWA 5.2
5 NEW HAMPSHIRE 5.2
7 WYOMING 5.3
8 OKLAHOMA 5.4
9 VIRGINIA 5.6
10 MINNESOTA 5.8
10 UTAH 5.8
12 KANSAS 6.2
12 MONTANA 6.2

There's a big difference between someone working producing $100,000 of value and someone not working producing zero value.

Also, the worker producing $100,000 of value may consume $50,000, while the non-worker producing zero may also consume $50,000.

******

It's not a "handout" to get part of your money back from the government.

We don't know the total federal taxes paid by North Dakota.

I doubt workers in aggregate receive more in government benefits than pay in taxes.

It all has to add up to 100%, for workers, non-workers, and the cost of government.

Of course, the federal government is running huge budget deficits, much of it from foreign workers, who've seen their U.S. investments erode from inflation, interest rates, and currency exchange rates.

******

AIG, if the assumption is U.S. federal tax dollars paid equal U.S. federal tax dollars received, then why is the unequal distribution of tax dollars received between states a problem?

Would it be better if federal tax dollars paid by each state equal federal tax dollars received for each state?

Also, hasn't North Dakota done more than its fair share producing value and paying taxes through employment?

-------

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=28997633&postID=170811559672185975

-------

PeakTrader said...

Jon says "Why are we still listening to Friedman?"

Because he made valuable contributions for a better understanding of economics.

******

Ben S. Bernanke
March 2, 2004
Money, Gold, and the Great Depression

"In contradiction to the prevalent view of the time (1963), that money and monetary policy played at most a purely passive role in the Depression, Friedman and Schwartz argued that "the [economic] contraction is in fact a tragic testimonial to the importance of monetary forces.""

******

"Milton Friedman was also known for his work on the consumption function, the permanent income hypothesis (1957), which Friedman himself referred to as his best scientific work... was best known for...the quantity theory of money... Other important contributions include his critique of the Phillips curve and the concept of the natural rate of unemployment (1968)...monetary history and theory, and the complexity of stabilization policy."

-------

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=28997633&postID=2609290829338283870

--------

PeakTrader said...

I suspect, if it wasn't for the depression, the LFPR would be at mid-2000s or early-1990s levels, e.g. 66% instead of 63.6%.

Given many Americans haven't saved enough for retirement, they'd work longer if they could, and given they're living longer, they can work past 65.

******

Chart - Historical Long-Term Unemployment (percent of total unemployed who were out of work for 52 weeks or more):

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/historical-long-term-unemployment-2-nov-2011.jpg

--------

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=28997633&postID=3370587899840902671

--------

PeakTrader said...

Both Fed papers don't take into account an intertemporal model that when U.S. consumption exceeded production in the 2001-07 expansion, because of low prices and interest rates, a period of production exceeding consumption follows, to compensate for the overconsumption.

When an intertemporal model is included, it suggests many of the 80 million Baby-Boomers (born between 1946-64) were forced into retirement, because the Obama Recovery is even weaker (in the time period) than the actual data show.

Also, I may add, many government workers lost their jobs in the Obama Recovery. Perhaps, they retired in their 50s and weren't replaced. Baby-Boomers 55 and over is a fast growing group.

--------

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=28997633&postID=3587189546665859306

--------

See data in two prior links

-------
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     PeakTrader.com Forum Index -> Articles All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by PeakTrader 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002