A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » Coins
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why We Left The Gold Standard



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old July 31st 11, 05:45 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Some Guy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Bremick" wrote in message ...
Making it unattainable is what I was getting at.

JAM


You're generalizing again, perhaps because it was difficult for you

Indeed. Just about everyone I knew was making good money during the 80s boom
economy.
Sure, Reagan was doing it with smoke and mirrors and the bill finally came due
after he was out of office but it was a good ride while it lasted!


Ads
  #62  
Old July 31st 11, 07:32 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bremick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 641
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Some Guy" wrote in message
...

"Bremick" wrote in message
...
Making it unattainable is what I was getting at.

JAM


You're generalizing again, perhaps because it was difficult for you

Indeed. Just about everyone I knew was making good money during the 80s
boom economy.
Sure, Reagan was doing it with smoke and mirrors and the bill finally came
due after he was out of office but it was a good ride while it lasted!


That's one of the keys-- take advantage of the good times to put things away
for the bad.


  #63  
Old August 1st 11, 05:38 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Richard L. Hall[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Bremick" wrote in message
...

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...
Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant
to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?


Really? People are living well on Unemployment Insurance? Unemployment
Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.


I never said people were "living well", although many are receiving over
$500 a week. That's $26,000 a year.


And who are they? The average unemployment payment in the country is about
$330/week. In Virginia, the MAXIMUM is about $355 or about $18500/year. So
if you were a worker in Virginia, making the average salary of $45000 or
about $865/week, you could expect to get $355 per week if you were laid
off. Most of the younger people I know with families, mortgages, and the
like, live paycheck to paycheck and a drop of $500 in their weekly income
would have a dramatic effect

I sure could manage to live on that, considering the alternatives.


I could probably live on it too if I were a retired government worker with a
big pension and health insurance paid mostly by the government and no
mortgage, or wife and kids to support. But thats not the typical worker in
the United States.

People don't pay into it. It comes from taxing employers,


Hey! you got something right!

but guess who ends up funding the cost in the long run. Once that 99 weeks
runs out people then can qualify for other types of federal assistance. It
never ends.


All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us
are
paying taxes for to keep going.


It's called a free society where people come together for the common
good.


You sound like someone from the flower child generation.

Or someone who read the U. S. Constitution. You know, like the Preamble
(caps are mine for emphasis) that goes

"WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, IN ORDER TO form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for
the United States of America."

Or Article I Section 8 that starts.

"Section. 8.

THE CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER TO LAY AND COLLECT TAXES, DUTIES, IMPOSTS AND
EXCISES, TO pay the Debts and PROVIDE FOR the common Defense and GENERAL
WELFARE OF THE UNITED STATES; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be
uniform throughout the United States;"



Personally, I think these passages should be required reading along with the
rest of the document.




--
Richard
http://www.richlh.com
Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is
no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.
- John Kenneth Galbraith -




  #64  
Old August 1st 11, 06:15 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Frank Galikanokus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 291
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard

"Richard L. Hall" wrote:

"Bremick" wrote in message
...

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...
Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant
to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?

Really? People are living well on Unemployment Insurance? Unemployment
Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.


I never said people were "living well", although many are receiving over
$500 a week. That's $26,000 a year.


And who are they? The average unemployment payment in the country is about
$330/week. In Virginia, the MAXIMUM is about $355 or about $18500/year. So
if you were a worker in Virginia, making the average salary of $45000 or
about $865/week, you could expect to get $355 per week if you were laid
off. Most of the younger people I know with families, mortgages, and the
like, live paycheck to paycheck and a drop of $500 in their weekly income
would have a dramatic effect

I sure could manage to live on that, considering the alternatives.


I could probably live on it too if I were a retired government worker with a
big pension and health insurance paid mostly by the government and no
mortgage, or wife and kids to support. But thats not the typical worker in
the United States.

People don't pay into it. It comes from taxing employers,


Hey! you got something right!

but guess who ends up funding the cost in the long run. Once that 99 weeks
runs out people then can qualify for other types of federal assistance. It
never ends.


All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us
are
paying taxes for to keep going.

It's called a free society where people come together for the common
good.


You sound like someone from the flower child generation.

Or someone who read the U. S. Constitution. You know, like the Preamble
(caps are mine for emphasis) that goes

"WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, IN ORDER TO form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for
the United States of America."

Or Article I Section 8 that starts.

"Section. 8.

THE CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER TO LAY AND COLLECT TAXES, DUTIES, IMPOSTS AND
EXCISES, TO pay the Debts and PROVIDE FOR the common Defense and GENERAL
WELFARE OF THE UNITED STATES; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be
uniform throughout the United States;"

Personally, I think these passages should be required reading along with the
rest of the document.

--
Richard
http://www.richlh.com
Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is
no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.
- John Kenneth Galbraith -


Wait, wait, did I hear one of yinz guys say you did well when taxes were
being raised and Reagan spent us into the largest deficit up until that
time?

JAM
  #65  
Old August 1st 11, 06:27 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Richard L. Hall[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...

In article , Bremick
wrote:


when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies.
What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of
work
for

Kind of hard when the family members you might turn to for support are
out of work too.


It was like that before Social Security and people learned to survive.


And what was average life expectancy before Social Security?



up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to
relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Are there skills that someone needs? Seriously, I think the problem is
that US businesses don't need American workers, only American
consumers.
They want to have the latter without the former, but it doesn't work
that
way. And the few places that are hiring only want to hire people who
are
already employed, which does not reduce unemployment one iota.


Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?


Really? People are living well on Unemployment Insurance?


About the only people who might live well on unemployment benefits are
single kids living with their parents who worked for a year or so at an
employer before getting laid off. Most states require that you worked for 4
of the previous 5 quarters before you are eligible for unemployment
benefits. Even then you'd get only half of what you made before as a
benefit. And you are required to be actively seeking a job. I can't
imagine a younger person with a family living high off the hog from it.
I've known many people who lost just about everything they had including
their houses and spent their pensions and savings because of prolonged
unemployment.


Unemployment Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.


People don't pay for it, it is part of the "employment tax (about 11-12% of
wages)" that employers pay to the federal government. But, of course, that
eventually gets passed on to consumers.


All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us
are
paying taxes for to keep going.


It's called a free society where people come together for the common good.


And it is in the Constitution.


--
Richard
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of
thinking we were at when we created them. (Albert Einstein)



  #66  
Old August 1st 11, 06:58 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Some Guy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard

"Richard L. Hall" wrote in message
...
Unemployment Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.


People don't pay for it, it is part of the "employment tax (about 11-12% of
wages)" that employers pay to the federal government. But, of course, that
eventually gets passed on to consumers.


In NJ and NY (and many other states) workers pay into the unemployment insurance
fund and their payments are matched by their empolyer.
This is a state level tax, not Federal as you claim.
You really should be more circumspect in trumpeting your ignorance.


  #67  
Old August 1st 11, 10:04 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Richard L. Hall[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Some Guy" wrote in message
...
"Richard L. Hall" wrote in message
...
Unemployment Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.


People don't pay for it, it is part of the "employment tax (about 11-12%
of wages)" that employers pay to the federal government. But, of course,
that eventually gets passed on to consumers.


In NJ and NY (and many other states) workers pay into the unemployment
insurance fund and their payments are matched by their empolyer.
This is a state level tax, not Federal as you claim.
You really should be more circumspect in trumpeting your ignorance.

Some states may require an employee to pay an unemployment tax in addition
to the employer paid federal tax. But I don't know of any state that is
exempt from the federal requirements.

From http://www.alllaw.com/articles/tax/article5.asp
"Payroll taxes are the state and federal taxes that you, as an employer, are
required to withhold and/or to pay on behalf of your employees. You are
required to withhold state and federal income taxes as well as social
security and Medicare taxes from your employees' wages. You are also
required to pay a matching amount of social security and Medicare taxes for
your employees and to pay State and Federal unemployment tax. ...

The employer also must pay State and Federal Unemployment Taxes (SUTA and
FUTA). The FUTA rate is 6.2 %, but you can take a credit of up to 5.4% for
SUTA taxes that you pay. If you are eligible for the maximum credit your
FUTA rate will be 0.8%. The wage base for FUTA is $7,000. You will stop
paying FUTA for each employee once his or her wages exceed $7,000 for the
year. You will need to check with your state about SUTA tax rates and the
wage base. Generally, your SUTA tax rate is based on the amount of
unemployment claims that are filed by employees that you have terminated.
When your business is new, your SUTA tax rate starts at the maximum and
declines if you build a history of few claims."


  #68  
Old August 2nd 11, 01:20 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Some Guy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard


"Richard L. Hall" wrote in message
...

"Some Guy" wrote in message
...
"Richard L. Hall" wrote in message
...
Unemployment Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.

People don't pay for it, it is part of the "employment tax (about 11-12% of
wages)" that employers pay to the federal government. But, of course, that
eventually gets passed on to consumers.


In NJ and NY (and many other states) workers pay into the unemployment
insurance fund and their payments are matched by their empolyer.
This is a state level tax, not Federal as you claim.
You really should be more circumspect in trumpeting your ignorance.

Some states may require an employee to pay an unemployment tax in addition to
the employer paid federal tax. But I don't know of any state that is exempt
from the federal requirements.

From http://www.alllaw.com/articles/tax/article5.asp
"Payroll taxes are the state and federal taxes that you, as an employer, are
required to withhold and/or to pay on behalf of your employees. You are
required to withhold state and federal income taxes as well as social security
and Medicare taxes from your employees' wages. You are also required to pay a
matching amount of social security and Medicare taxes for your employees and
to pay State and Federal unemployment tax. ...

The employer also must pay State and Federal Unemployment Taxes (SUTA and
FUTA). The FUTA rate is 6.2 %, but you can take a credit of up to 5.4% for
SUTA taxes that you pay. If you are eligible for the maximum credit your FUTA
rate will be 0.8%. The wage base for FUTA is $7,000. You will stop paying FUTA
for each employee once his or her wages exceed $7,000 for the year. You will
need to check with your state about SUTA tax rates and the wage base.
Generally, your SUTA tax rate is based on the amount of unemployment claims
that are filed by employees that you have terminated. When your business is
new, your SUTA tax rate starts at the maximum and declines if you build a
history of few claims."


Your reply is a verbose non sequitur, designed not to illuminate but to
obfuscate.
You claimed employees do not pay for their unemployement benefits when they, in
fact, do.


  #69  
Old August 2nd 11, 02:41 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Peter[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard

On Jul 30, 9:20*am, Jim wrote:
On Jul 22, 3:13*pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:



I think this quote from the article makes more sense than you little quip.


"Almost all economists agree, the system we have today is better than the gold standard.
Not perfect, but much better."


Which poll asked 'almost all economists' this question about the gold
standard? Which economists were polled and what was the selection
criteria?

Here's an example where President 0bama claimed that 'all economists
agree', and about 200 wrote him back and told him they didn't agree:

http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus...e_version.html

What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act


Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed by Bill Clinton. It is clear that the
repeal of Glass-Steagall was not at fault for the economic meltdown of
2008-2009. The tactic of packaging mortgages into securities was
invented by GNMA (Government National Mortgage Association) in the
1970s.

And furthermore, it can easily be seen that allowing financial firms
to do both commercial and investment banking had nothing to do with
the problems. The securities firms that got into the most trouble
(Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch) had little or no
involvement in commercial banking. And the savings & loan/mortgage
companies that got into the most trouble (Washington Mutual,
Countrywide) had little or no involvement in investment banking.


Actually, the idea of creating securities out of debt was known in the
1920s and contributed to the crash of 1929. It was a relatively small
factor then, but was improved to better aid our susequent disaster in
2007.
  #70  
Old August 2nd 11, 02:53 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Peter[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Why We Left The Gold Standard

On Jul 29, 11:10*pm, "Bremick" wrote:

....

China never sends invading troops. They aren't configured to do that like we
are. *And why should they? *They have no wide alliances. *They can sit back
and watch. *About like we will have to do eventually. *I have no real
disagreement with what you're saying.


Actually, China used to be (and still is) an important competitor for
the US. Lately, they are facing competition from countries that work
even cheaper. They have indeed sent troops to guard colonies they
have set up. In some places in Africa, they have tried to force
locals to work under such severe conditions, that the local people
refused to work. The Chinese solved the problem by bringing in their
own citizens (slaves?).

The Chinese government doesn't bother about healthcare, unemployment
insurance or pensions.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FDR takes United States off gold standard, 1933 Frank Galikanokus[_2_] Coins 0 June 5th 11 02:10 PM
A 'Wingnut Argument' For The Gold Standard Frank Galikanokus[_2_] Coins 17 February 13th 11 03:34 AM
FA: Radicals, Rebels, And Rogues: A different kind of Ebay auction.J.S.G. Boggs, NORFED, Gold Standard, and more Phil[_4_] Coins 1 December 13th 07 05:22 PM
Rise and fall of the gold standard stonej Coins 0 October 21st 05 02:51 PM
FA: 1 Day Left!! 2 Gold Pens Roger H Smith Pens & Pencils 0 February 13th 04 12:02 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.