[nocommonsense]

[quote=briansd1]$800 per year maintenance is cheaper than buying a new car in the same class. Even $1,500/year would be more economical.[/quote]

I’d agree with him on this one. I was faced with the same conundrum a few years ago. I did the math and realized as bad as $1000-1500 a year repair cost sounds, it’s still more economical than buying a new car.

That said, buying a good low mileage used Japanese car would be the best solution. But you never know if you’re getting a lemon or not. In my case I bought a new Honda at a price cheaper than most used cars ($16K).

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ltokuda]One major concern I have about the US economy is the trade imbalance we have with China. A large part of the problem is that China pegs its currecy to the US dollar to keep its currency artificially low and give it an “unfair” trade advantage. However, one weapon the US seems to have against this is the printing press. In order for China to maintain the currency advantage, they will have to continuously buy more US treasuries. So it seems like we can run up the debt and effectively “force” China to buy it. This lets us export much of the inflationary effects to them. I’m not completely sure but I think this might actually work in our favor.[/quote]

You’re likely correct, as China started to see rampant inflation as of a few weeks ago, with everyday food prices increasing as much as 20, 30 or even over 100%. It was all over the news there. China IS paying for the economic sins of the US.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ltokuda]One major concern I have about the US economy is the trade imbalance we have with China. A large part of the problem is that China pegs its currecy to the US dollar to keep its currency artificially low and give it an “unfair” trade advantage. However, one weapon the US seems to have against this is the printing press. In order for China to maintain the currency advantage, they will have to continuously buy more US treasuries. So it seems like we can run up the debt and effectively “force” China to buy it. This lets us export much of the inflationary effects to them. I’m not completely sure but I think this might actually work in our favor.[/quote]

You’re likely correct, as China started to see rampant inflation as of a few weeks ago, with everyday food prices increasing as much as 20, 30 or even over 100%. It was all over the news there. China IS paying for the economic sins of the US.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ltokuda]One major concern I have about the US economy is the trade imbalance we have with China. A large part of the problem is that China pegs its currecy to the US dollar to keep its currency artificially low and give it an “unfair” trade advantage. However, one weapon the US seems to have against this is the printing press. In order for China to maintain the currency advantage, they will have to continuously buy more US treasuries. So it seems like we can run up the debt and effectively “force” China to buy it. This lets us export much of the inflationary effects to them. I’m not completely sure but I think this might actually work in our favor.[/quote]

You’re likely correct, as China started to see rampant inflation as of a few weeks ago, with everyday food prices increasing as much as 20, 30 or even over 100%. It was all over the news there. China IS paying for the economic sins of the US.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ltokuda]One major concern I have about the US economy is the trade imbalance we have with China. A large part of the problem is that China pegs its currecy to the US dollar to keep its currency artificially low and give it an “unfair” trade advantage. However, one weapon the US seems to have against this is the printing press. In order for China to maintain the currency advantage, they will have to continuously buy more US treasuries. So it seems like we can run up the debt and effectively “force” China to buy it. This lets us export much of the inflationary effects to them. I’m not completely sure but I think this might actually work in our favor.[/quote]

You’re likely correct, as China started to see rampant inflation as of a few weeks ago, with everyday food prices increasing as much as 20, 30 or even over 100%. It was all over the news there. China IS paying for the economic sins of the US.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ltokuda]One major concern I have about the US economy is the trade imbalance we have with China. A large part of the problem is that China pegs its currecy to the US dollar to keep its currency artificially low and give it an “unfair” trade advantage. However, one weapon the US seems to have against this is the printing press. In order for China to maintain the currency advantage, they will have to continuously buy more US treasuries. So it seems like we can run up the debt and effectively “force” China to buy it. This lets us export much of the inflationary effects to them. I’m not completely sure but I think this might actually work in our favor.[/quote]

You’re likely correct, as China started to see rampant inflation as of a few weeks ago, with everyday food prices increasing as much as 20, 30 or even over 100%. It was all over the news there. China IS paying for the economic sins of the US.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=nocommonsense]It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

Most government spending goes toward Social Security and Medicare. There is no means test to receive these – both the rich and poor receive benefits. The basic qualification is simply to have paid into the programs and to be old.

Any increase in the marginal tax rate above $250K won’t go toward these programs anyway. It will go toward the general, discretionary budget.
But don’t stop listening to Glenn – the real thugs have a lot of power, but they still need your help.[/quote]

I actually don’t listen to Beck but I’m a conservative. You made some very nice points about where the spending is. My point is that regardless where the tax money is being spent, if we can’t afford it we must cut spending across the board.

And there’s no dispute that the left in this county has a Robin Hood philosophy.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=nocommonsense]It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

Most government spending goes toward Social Security and Medicare. There is no means test to receive these – both the rich and poor receive benefits. The basic qualification is simply to have paid into the programs and to be old.

Any increase in the marginal tax rate above $250K won’t go toward these programs anyway. It will go toward the general, discretionary budget.
But don’t stop listening to Glenn – the real thugs have a lot of power, but they still need your help.[/quote]

I actually don’t listen to Beck but I’m a conservative. You made some very nice points about where the spending is. My point is that regardless where the tax money is being spent, if we can’t afford it we must cut spending across the board.

And there’s no dispute that the left in this county has a Robin Hood philosophy.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=nocommonsense]It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

Most government spending goes toward Social Security and Medicare. There is no means test to receive these – both the rich and poor receive benefits. The basic qualification is simply to have paid into the programs and to be old.

Any increase in the marginal tax rate above $250K won’t go toward these programs anyway. It will go toward the general, discretionary budget.
But don’t stop listening to Glenn – the real thugs have a lot of power, but they still need your help.[/quote]

I actually don’t listen to Beck but I’m a conservative. You made some very nice points about where the spending is. My point is that regardless where the tax money is being spent, if we can’t afford it we must cut spending across the board.

And there’s no dispute that the left in this county has a Robin Hood philosophy.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=nocommonsense]It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

Most government spending goes toward Social Security and Medicare. There is no means test to receive these – both the rich and poor receive benefits. The basic qualification is simply to have paid into the programs and to be old.

Any increase in the marginal tax rate above $250K won’t go toward these programs anyway. It will go toward the general, discretionary budget.
But don’t stop listening to Glenn – the real thugs have a lot of power, but they still need your help.[/quote]

I actually don’t listen to Beck but I’m a conservative. You made some very nice points about where the spending is. My point is that regardless where the tax money is being spent, if we can’t afford it we must cut spending across the board.

And there’s no dispute that the left in this county has a Robin Hood philosophy.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=nocommonsense]It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

Most government spending goes toward Social Security and Medicare. There is no means test to receive these – both the rich and poor receive benefits. The basic qualification is simply to have paid into the programs and to be old.

Any increase in the marginal tax rate above $250K won’t go toward these programs anyway. It will go toward the general, discretionary budget.
But don’t stop listening to Glenn – the real thugs have a lot of power, but they still need your help.[/quote]

I actually don’t listen to Beck but I’m a conservative. You made some very nice points about where the spending is. My point is that regardless where the tax money is being spent, if we can’t afford it we must cut spending across the board.

And there’s no dispute that the left in this county has a Robin Hood philosophy.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ocrenter]
The truth about the over 250k class is this: If their income over 250k is tax’d heavily, it would be their incentive to spend that > 250k income as much as possible in the form of business related deductions. If their over 250k income is not taxed as heavily, they just end up saving it or investing in financial holdings.[/quote]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ocrenter]
The truth about the over 250k class is this: If their income over 250k is tax’d heavily, it would be their incentive to spend that > 250k income as much as possible in the form of business related deductions. If their over 250k income is not taxed as heavily, they just end up saving it or investing in financial holdings.[/quote]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ocrenter]
The truth about the over 250k class is this: If their income over 250k is tax’d heavily, it would be their incentive to spend that > 250k income as much as possible in the form of business related deductions. If their over 250k income is not taxed as heavily, they just end up saving it or investing in financial holdings.[/quote]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.

[nocommonsense]

[quote=ocrenter]
The truth about the over 250k class is this: If their income over 250k is tax’d heavily, it would be their incentive to spend that > 250k income as much as possible in the form of business related deductions. If their over 250k income is not taxed as heavily, they just end up saving it or investing in financial holdings.[/quote]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.

[Author]

Posts