Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

  1. #1
    Featured Member MissSassyPickles's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,233
    Thanks
    1,664
    Thanked 2,518 Times in 767 Posts
    My Mood
    Psychedelic

    Default 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    "Early indicators are all pointing upward..."

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...reaking24.html

    Thoughts?
    Quote Originally Posted by qurl View Post
    You are sassy AND smart Miss Pickles.

    "Well behaved women seldom make history." - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  2. #2
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    ^^^ the Eurozone has quite a number of 'structural' problems. While discussion of a good number of those problems would be in violation of the DD politics ban, some of the economic issues can be covered ...

    - The Euro has become somewhat of an alternate 'reserve currency' for countries wishing to not have all of their eggs ( i.e. rubles, yuan, rupees etc. ) in one basket ( of US dollars ). This has served to increase the exchange rate for the Euro ... arguably to the point where European products are an extremely tough sell outside of ther Eurozone.

    - While some of this strong Euro pain was disguisable via 'seller financed' sale of products to other European countries, the importing Eurozone countries ( i.e. Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy etc. ) are now beyond broke. Thus the gov'ts of the exporting countries are no longer willing to continue spending taxpayer dollars to provide their exporting companies with a de-facto gov't subsidized market.

    - The 'costs of doing business' in the Eurozone are incredibly high ... for reasons that mostly can't be discussed in this forum. However, there are a number of countries directly adjacent in eastern europe where the 'costs of doing business' are far lower. Because of this differential, many Eurozone companies have relocated their 'growth' to those eastern european countries.

    - While Gerard Depardieu's economic exodus from France was the only incident that garnered worldwide publicity, for a fact high earning Eurozone residents have been steadily relocating themselves and/or their money to the UK, to certain caribbean islands, to certain south american countries etc. These capital outflows and reduced Eurozone 'consumption' spending, while representing only a fraction of a percent of the Eurozone population, in fact represents several percent of the Eurozone's total economy.

    - The cumulative effects of the Eurozone's 'high costs of doing business' over a period of more than a decade, combined with other issues which affect the ability of Eurozone companies to freely fire and hire, has created a general climate where some number young, highly motivated people have chosen to pursue business and job opportunities outside of the Eurozone. This has arguably caused Eurozone businesses to be less ... 'dynamic', and has also resulted in some measure of real new 'wealth' to be created outside of the Eurozone instead of within.

  3. #3
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post

    - While Gerard Depardieu's economic exodus from France was the only incident that garnered worldwide publicity, for a fact high earning Eurozone residents have been steadily relocating themselves and/or their money to the UK, to certain caribbean islands, to certain south american countries etc. These capital outflows and reduced Eurozone 'consumption' spending, while representing only a fraction of a percent of the Eurozone population, in fact represents several percent of the Eurozone's total economy.
    I doubt very much that high-earning residents consisting of "several percent of the Eurozone's total economy" have left the European zone. It's my guess that you just made this up.
    Last edited by eagle2; 02-19-2013 at 10:03 PM.

  4. #4
    Featured Member MissSassyPickles's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,233
    Thanks
    1,664
    Thanked 2,518 Times in 767 Posts
    My Mood
    Psychedelic

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    I doubt very much that high-earning residents consisting of "several percent of the Eurozone's total economy" have left the European zone. It's my guess that you just made this up.
    Well I did read previously about how France is having a lot of wealthy citizens leave the country. They have been trying to sell their extravagant pieces of real estate for deep discounts and still aren't having any takers.

    There was going to be an increase on the wealthy, it was 75% but was ruled unconstitutional that's the last I heard, not sure where it stands now.

    Keeping the Pareto principal in mind, if 80% of the money is being made by 20% of the citizens, and is an even greater proportion as you reach the top 5% or so of the wealthy class, I think that Melonie's figures, guesstimate or not, could definitely be possible.
    Quote Originally Posted by qurl View Post
    You are sassy AND smart Miss Pickles.

    "Well behaved women seldom make history." - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  5. #5
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    The total gdp, or income of the European Union is approximately $17.6 trillion.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurozone#Comparison_table

    That means one percent of the EU's gdp is approximately $176 billion.

    In order for Melonie to be correct, it would mean that the wealthy people leaving the EU have a combined income of approximately $500 billion. Note that this is total income, not wealth. I doubt that the actual number is anywhere near this level. I doubt that it's even near one percent.

  6. #6
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    there are no official statistics available to factually substantiate my point. What does exist is indirect evidence in the form of , or

    A stat cited in the latter link was that (snip)More than €3bn (£2.6bn) of deposits held by Greek households and companies left the country in February, while in January about €5bn of deposits were moved out, according to the latest figures available from the Bank of Greece. Switzerland, the UK and Cyprus have been the largest recipients of the money(snip) . So given the exchange rate, just two months worth of transfers out of the Eurozone's 'smallest' country accounts for US$10 billion !!! Given that the economies of France, Italy, Spain etc. dwarf that of Greece ...

  7. #7
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    As often happens, both Melonie and Eagle are both right. Eagle is correct that there are no hard stats (YET) on how many Continental residents are relocating to avoid ruinous tax rates. Melonie is correct that such relocation is occurring. We can tell by looking at bank deposits and real estate transactions.

    After W.W. II when Attlee and Labour defeated Churchill and the Tories , Britain embarked on a path of nationalization and exhorbitant tax rates. What happened ? Many wealthy Britons left the U.K. for the U.S. , Canada , the Caribbean , Monaco , Spain and dozens of other places. The ranks of tax exiles swelled even more in the 1970's under Harold Wilson. It was only after several years of Thatcherism that the rate slowed and then reversed as many British moved back.

    France is seeing the same thing and unlike Britain it doesn't just punish high earners. They also have a wealth tax.

    Compared to those examples , the stream of tax exiles from the U.S. is a comparative tricklle and on a net basis, we might even be gaining high income residents. We certainly see what is happening in California, Illinois, N.Y. and N.J. All are losing high income residents to other lower tax states. Btw, for sports fans in these states it is already having a negative effect. Free agents in baseball, basketball and football are less likely to sign with teams in those states when they get the same money in Florida and Texas , neither of which have state or local income taxes.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 02-22-2013 at 08:25 AM.

  8. #8
    Featured Member MissSassyPickles's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,233
    Thanks
    1,664
    Thanked 2,518 Times in 767 Posts
    My Mood
    Psychedelic

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    @Eric lol at introducing sports to this thread!

    Yeah I tried myself to find the stats supporting either view and had a hard time doing so

    I'm a resident of one of the high tax states you mentioned and not only am I getting out to avoid the higher taxes but I have a lot of friends who are doing the same because it's just not worth it to them anymore. I would feel better about it if they actually spent their tax dollars on say the crime ridden areas, infrastructure, etc. instead of arresting me and my peers for victimless crimes!
    Quote Originally Posted by qurl View Post
    You are sassy AND smart Miss Pickles.

    "Well behaved women seldom make history." - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  9. #9
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Yeah I tried myself to find the stats supporting either view and had a hard time doing so
    Well, by definition, 'private' banks in the UK channel islands, the Cayman islands, Lichtenstein, many central american countries, many asian countries etc. do NOT report their cash flows !!!! Switzerland doesn't either, but after the recent IRS driven info sharing 'settlement' it will be forced to in the future ( which will also force many former depositors to move their money ).

    Also, while some rough statistics do exist regarding the exodus of high earning residents of high tax rate US states ( like lost population from census to census ), it's very difficult to quantify the net dollars involved. Did 100,000 high earning residents leave to reduce their tax burden, or did 200,000 high earning residents actually leave but 100,000 low income residents moved in to take advantage of generous state social welfare benefits ? In terms of the state's economy, the distinction can be extremely significant !!! And similar to the banks, nobody is anxious for this sort of data to appear in mainstream media. High tax rate Eurozone countries hold an analogous position to high tax rate US states.

  10. #10
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    As often happens, both Melonie and Eagle are both right. Eagle is correct that there are no hard stats (YET) on how many Continental residents are relocating to avoid ruinous tax rates. Melonie is correct that such relocation is occurring. We can tell by looking at bank deposits and real estate transactions.
    I'm not disputing that there are Europeans who relocate to other countries to pay less taxes. What I'm disputing is Melonie's claim that the total income of these people amounts to several percent of the EU economy. There is no basis for that figure and it is a HUGE exaggeration.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Compared to those examples , the stream of tax exiles from the U.S. is a comparative tricklle and on a net basis, we might even be gaining high income residents. We certainly see what is happening in California, Illinois, N.Y. and N.J. All are losing high income residents to other lower tax states. Btw, for sports fans in thise states it is already having a negative effect. Free agents in baseball, basketball and football are less likely to sign with teams in those states when they get the same money in Florida and Texas , neither of which have state or local income taxes.
    The facts would say otherwise. Teams located in high tax states, such as California, New York/New Jersey, and Massachusetts, have been very successful. Boston is the only city whose sports teams have won championships in all four major sports over the past 10 years. Three of the past four World Series have been won by teams from New York or California. I don’t think a team from Texas has ever won the World Series. The New York Giants and New England Patriots have both won two Superbowls over the past 10 years. A team from Texas hasn’t won the Superbowl since 1996. A Florida team hasn’t won the Superbowl since 2003.

  11. #11
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    there are no official statistics available to factually substantiate my point. What does exist is indirect evidence in the form of http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...don-homes.html , or http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-offshore.html

    A stat cited in the latter link was that (snip)More than €3bn (£2.6bn) of deposits held by Greek households and companies left the country in February, while in January about €5bn of deposits were moved out, according to the latest figures available from the Bank of Greece. Switzerland, the UK and Cyprus have been the largest recipients of the money(snip) . So given the exchange rate, just two months worth of transfers out of the Eurozone's 'smallest' country accounts for US$10 billion !!! Given that the economies of France, Italy, Spain etc. dwarf that of Greece ...
    Greece's economy is in dire straits, which is why significant amounts of money are being moved out of the country. In addition, we're talking about annual income, not total wealth. For most wealthy people, their total wealth is much greater than their annual income.

    I doubt that the total wealth of Caribbean countries is even $500 billion.

    As for Britain, if wealthy people consisting of several percent of EU's total economy moved from the EU to Britain, you would think that you would see a corresponding drop in European gdp and increase in Britain's gdp. In reality, Britain's economy declined a lot more than major European countries, such as France and Germany.

    http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

    France and Germany both have higher per-capita gdp than Britain. Britain's per-capita gdp is approximately 10% lower now than it was in 2008.

  12. #12
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    I'm not disputing that there are Europeans who relocate to other countries to pay less taxes. What I'm disputing is Melonie's claim that the total income of these people amounts to several percent of the EU economy. There is no basis for that figure and it is a HUGE exaggeration.



    The facts would say otherwise. Teams located in high tax states, such as California, New York/New Jersey, and Massachusetts, have been very successful. Boston is the only city whose sports teams have won championships in all four major sports over the past 10 years. Three of the past four World Series have been won by teams from New York or California. I don’t think a team from Texas has ever won the World Series. The New York Giants and New England Patriots have both won two Superbowls over the past 10 years. A team from Texas hasn’t won the Superbowl since 1996. A Florida team hasn’t won the Superbowl since 2003.
    As you are prone to do, you didn't READ what I posted before responding. I wasn't talking about the past. I am talking about now and in the future. It has widely reported that players and their agents are taking local and state taxes into account before deciding where to sign. Fortunately, more players are aware of taxes now than in the past. They've been lectured to by former players who made big money and are now broke because inter alia, they didn't pay their taxes. You are aware that pro athletes have to pay income taxes in every state that has an income tax and where they play a game. In football, that can be as many as 9 different states ( 8 home games and 8 on the road. ) In baseball, it can be even worse for a player based on a California team = 81 home games and potentially over 30 more on the road but still in Cali. Compare that to a guy who signes with the Marlins , Rays , Rangers or Astros. He's guaranteed to have 81 games in a NO Income Tax state.

    The Feds were not alone in raising taxes on the "millionaires and billionaires". So did California. Remember ?

    I have a very good friend who has bounced around the majors. One of the big reasons he signed with the Diamondbacks is that they are in a low tax state.

    None of this means that players will not sign with teams in high tax states. Just that they might be less likely to do so than formerly. Now they have one more thing to think about. We know this because of the difficulty that Canadian teams have had in signing free agents compared to American teams. None of this is new or groundbreaking. It's been all over the sports pages and sports talk radio. It's a potentially serious problem for the Lakers and their rebuilding plans i.e. players can "max out" elsewhere and keep more of their paychecks.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 02-25-2013 at 08:25 AM.

  13. #13
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    What I'm disputing is Melonie's claim that the total income of these people amounts to several percent of the EU economy.
    I didn't confine my comments to income. Assets matter too ... because they are subject to European country 'wealth tax' ( which the USA does not have ... yet ) on the negative side, and because they form the reserve funds base for business expansion on the positive side.


    if wealthy people consisting of several percent of EU's total economy moved from the EU to Britain, you would think that you would see a corresponding drop in European gdp and increase in Britain's gdp
    Spending a million Euros on an Aston Martin and a London townhouse is one thing. Depositing 10+ Million Euros in a UK channel island based hedge fund is something else altogether ( because that money might be deployed in China, South America etc. ). The falling private sector component of European gdp is undeniable and disturbing. But, outdoing the FED, 'money printing' by the ECB plus deficit spending by European gov'ts has attempted to fill the gap via expanding the public sector gdp component.

  14. #14
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    You originally said:

    "These capital outflows and reduced Eurozone 'consumption' spending, while representing only a fraction of a percent of the Eurozone population, in fact represents several percent of the Eurozone's total economy."

    A country or region's "economy" generally means their gdp or total income, not total wealth or assets.

  15. #15
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    ^^^ capital outflows involve assets far more than current year income. I did not say GDP, nor did I say income.

    And to go one step further, GDP has arguably lost standing as a realistic indicator of an economy, since central banks with printing presses and gov'ts with deficit spending are able to manipulate the public sector component of GDP any way they choose. Similarly, 'income' has arguably lost standing as a realistic indicator of an economy since the aforementioned gov't deficit spending of newly printed money is increasingly directed toward 'transfer payments' ( i.e. welfare checks, unemployment checks, etc. ) which are counted as 'income' to the recipients.

    I understand and agree to disagree that the Keynesians see no difference between private sector assets accumulated over years versus newly printed central bank assets, and see no difference between incomes earned by the production of new real 'wealth' versus incomes derived from newly printed central bank funded gov't transfer payments.

  16. #16
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    An economy is measured by gdp, which is the value of all goods and services produced in that economy, whether those goods or services are paid for by the government or private sector, and includes goods and services paid for in cash or borrowed money. If Boeing builds a 747, the value of that 747 is the same whether it is bought by someone in the private sector or government sector.

  17. #17
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    ^^^ actually, with your example, it matters whether or not that Boeing 747 is really paid for or not !!! Or in this case let's use Airbus since it is a Eurozone product. If a Greek airline bought an Airbus with EuroZone 'bailout' money loaned to the Greek gov't, and that loaned money was essentially paid for at a rate of 50 cents on the Euro ( or less ) by devalued Greek gov't bonds, with the shortfall then indirectly subsidized via European gov't tax breaks to Airbus, what's the actual net contribution to the EuroZone GDP ??? The arguable problem with the GDP statistic is that ot attempts to count 'production' that isn't actually paid for. Or stated another way, it attempts to count dubiously funded 'assets' without accounting for resulting unfunded 'liabilities'.

  18. #18
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    It doesn't matter. GDP is the total value of all goods and services produced in a specific region or country. You're trying to make up your own definition of GDP.

    I doubt any EuroZone 'bailout' money is being used to buy Airbus airliners. It's probably all being used to payoff debt.
    Last edited by eagle2; 02-24-2013 at 02:15 AM.

  19. #19
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    No, I never made any comments about GDP. YOU brought up that statistic as a supposedly accurate measure of a country's economy. I dispute that today's GDP numbers have much relevance re the true state of a country's economy, and especially so when the gov't gets to pick what to count and what NOT to count. Obviously we agree to disagree.

    As to European taxpayer subsidies for Airbus purchases, Alitalia has already been 'bailed out' by the Italian gov't, and one of Alitalia's largest debts is loans used for previous purchases of Airbus airliners. Where Greek airlines are concerned, gov't owned Olympic Airlines is de-facto bankrupt and dependent on continuing injections of Greek ( now EuroZone ) taxpayer money. And some of that money is being used to meet loan payments for previous purchases of Airbus airliners !!! Like it or not, gov't backed Airbus plus gov't backed 'national' airlines plus union workers plus taxpayer money has been a match made in heaven ( if you're a european politician or airbus / airline exec or a union worker ) or hell ( if you're a european taxpayer ).

  20. #20
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Well, first of all we have to use something to measure economic growth. Unless and until something better comes along, GDP will have to do. Of course , GDP figures can and ought to be discounted under certain circumstances, as Melonie pointed out.

    The state of various European national airlines raises an interesting point : Why ? Why have all these separate national airlines ? Why not combine them ? They already buy Airbus ; their pilots are required to speak English ; tickets are paid for mostly with Euros. Just a thought.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 02-26-2013 at 08:25 AM.

  21. #21
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Why have all these separate national airlines ? Why not combine them ?
    Presumably because the taxpayers in one EuroZone country are unhappy enough about having to subsidize operating losses for their OWN national airline ... without also being required to send their tax money to another EuroZone country to subsidize that country's national airline operating losses as well !!! The root of the problem, of course, is that when these EuroZone national airlines are forced to compete with independent airlines based in the US, UK, Asia, Middle East etc. their cost structures guarantee an operating loss. Unfortunately, further discussion would violate the politics ban.

    As to GDP being any sort of a valid yardstick for economic growth, with all of the central bank money printing going on lately that correlation is approaching the laughable. There are lots of alternate measures of economic growth ... from YOY total employment to YOY retail sales ... which have a far higher correlation.

  22. #22
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ capital outflows involve assets far more than current year income. I did not say GDP, nor did I say income.

    And to go one step further, GDP has arguably lost standing as a realistic indicator of an economy, since central banks with printing presses and gov'ts with deficit spending are able to manipulate the public sector component of GDP any way they choose. Similarly, 'income' has arguably lost standing as a realistic indicator of an economy since the aforementioned gov't deficit spending of newly printed money is increasingly directed toward 'transfer payments' ( i.e. welfare checks, unemployment checks, etc. ) which are counted as 'income' to the recipients.
    You're making stuff up again. Transfer payments are not counted as 'income' when calculating gdp/total income.

    On government expenditures included in gdp:
    http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_gui...leId-9733.html

    Government expenditures: Government expenditures on consumption and investment goods and services are treated as a separate category in the expenditure approach to GDP. Examples of government expenditures include the hiring of civil servants and military personnel and the construction of roads and public buildings. Social security, welfare, and other transfer payments are not included in government expenditures. Recipients of transfer payments do not provide any current goods or services in exchanges for these payments. Hence, government expenditures on transfer payments do not involve the purchase of any new goods or services and are therefore excluded from the calculation of government expenditures.

  23. #23
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    As you are prone to do, you didn't READ what I posted before responding. I wasn't talking about the past. I am talking about now and in the future. It has widely reported that players and their agents are taking local and state taxes into account before deciding where to sign. Fortunately, more players are aware of taxes now than in the past. They've been lectured to by former players who made big money and are now broke because inter alia, they didn't pay their taxes. You are aware that pro athletes have to pay income taxes in every state that has an income tax and where they play a game. In football, that can be as many as 9 different states ( 8 home games and 8 on the road. ) In baseball, it can be even worse for a player based on a California team = 81 home games and potentially over 30 more on the road but still in Cali. Compare that to a guy who signes with the Marlins , Rays , Rangers or Astros. He's guaranteed to have 81 games in a NO Income Tax state.

    The Feds were not alone in raising taxes on the "millionaires and billionaires". So did California. Remember ?

    I have a very good friend who has bounced around the majors. One of the big reasons he signed with the Diamondbacks is that they are in a low tax state.

    None of this means that players will not sign with teams in high tax states. Just that they might be less likely to do so than formerly. Now they have one more thing to think about. We know this because of the difficulty that Canadian teams have had in signing free agents compared to American teams. None of this is new or groundbreaking. It's been all over the sports pages and sports talk radio. It's a potentially serious problem for the Lakers and their rebuilding plans i.e. players can "max out" elsewhere and keep more of their paychecks.
    I did read what you posted. My point is, California, New York/New Jersey, and Massachusetts have had much higher tax rates than states like Arizona, Texas, and Florida for decades, yet that has not prevented them from signing the best players in the past. Why should it be different in the future? Perhaps for some of the average players, state and local taxes, and cost of living do play a factor in deciding where they choose to play, but it doesn't seem to be the case for the elite athletes. There's been countless examples of top athletes leaving a low-tax state to play in a high-tax state. The top players are much more concerned about the organization they're playing for, than they are about state and local tax rates. A-Rod left Texas to play in high tax New York City. Curt Shilling left Arizona to play in Boston. When Shaquille O'Neal first became a free-agent, he left Orlando to go to Los Angeles. Most recently Steve Nash left Arizona to play for Los Angeles.

    I doubt that there are any highly paid former pro athletes that went bankrupt from paying taxes. In most cases where a former player goes bankrupt, it's because he was stupid and irresponsible with his money.

    I doubt that any player that takes the time to plan for his future, lives within his means, and doesn't put all of his money into very risky investments, ends up going bankrupt.
    Last edited by eagle2; 02-25-2013 at 11:10 PM.

  24. #24
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    ^^^ again you are trying to put words in my mouth. Gov't transfer payments to benefit recipients are indeed not counted in the public sector component of GDP. However the same money IS counted in the private sector spending component of GDP, since it amounts to the 'income' to the beneficiaries. Thus the GDP statistic gives equal weight to spending by productive workers, versus spending by non-productive non-workers. The real world economy recognizes a clear difference ... since the former is newly created wealth being spent, where the latter is redistributed wealth being spent.


    My point is, California, New York/New Jersey, and Massachusetts have had much higher tax rates than states like Arizona, Texas, and Florida for decades, yet that has not prevented them from signing the best players in the past. Why should it be different in the future?
    arguably, it's that a 'tipping point' has been reached. When past NY total taxes amounted to 5%, the appeal of the big apple easily outweighed a 5% cost. But when current NY total taxes approach 12% ( NY state + city ), with the 7% differential amounting to enough money to buy a new house every year, all of a sudden the high earners are forced to think twice whether the big apple really offers that much appeal after all.

  25. #25
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: 2012 First year eurozone shows no growth in any quarter since tracking in 1995

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    I did read what you posted. My point is, California, New York/New Jersey, and Massachusetts have had much higher tax rates than states like Arizona, Texas, and Florida for decades, yet that has not prevented them from signing the best players in the past. Why should it be different in the future? Perhaps for some of the average players, state and local taxes, and cost of living do play a factor in deciding where they choose to play, but it doesn't seem to be the case for the elite athletes. There's been countless examples of top athletes leaving a low-tax state to play in a high-tax state. The top players are much more concerned about the organization they're playing for, than they are about state and local tax rates. A-Rod left Texas to play in high tax New York City. Curt Shilling left Arizona to play in Boston. When Shaquille O'Neal first became a free-agent, he left Orlando to go to Los Angeles. Most recently Steve Nash left Arizona to play for Los Angeles.

    I doubt that there are any highly paid former pro athletes that went bankrupt from paying taxes. In most cases where a former player goes bankrupt, it's because he was stupid and irresponsible with his money.

    I doubt that any player that takes the time to plan for his future, lives within his means, and doesn't put all of his money into very risky investments, ends up going bankrupt.
    No you didn't. You couldn't have because dumb you are NOT. Sometimes sloppy and incomplete with your facts but I've been guilty of that too.

    You used the past tense and looked back. I am talking about the present and the future. California teams are already operating under a handicap. Lebron signed with Miami because inter alia Florida has no income taxes.

    Now is different from then. Football and hockey have hard salary caps. Basketball's cap is harder now than it was. Point being that they can no longer offer the type of money to elite players than they used to. Maxed out is maxed out. All baseball clubs except maybe the Dodgers , are all trying to keep their payrolls under the Luxury Tax threshold. Even the Yankees. Tax considerations matter for ALL players.

    You missed the point entirely as to players paying their taxes. Many a former player made millions and ended up broke because for one thing they did NOT pay their taxes. Uncle Sam ( and his state equivalents ) always gets his. The interest and penalties pile up and relatively moderate underpayment can result in a crushing amount of unpaid taxes. There are numerous cases of this very thing. ESPN did a two hour special on this and related issues. Something like 1/3 of the current members of the various Halls of Fame have gone bankrupt. Some more than once.

    The whole point ( and I did have one lol ) is that taxes are a BIGGER issue now for ALL pro athletes. Including the highest paid elite. Why do you think so many current and former players live in Florida and Texas ?

    As I said, none of this stuff is new. It has been widely reported on in S. I. , on ESPN and sports talk radio. Guys like John Heyman and Gary Myers who get paid to monitor the free agent and trade markets in pro sports have ALL noted tax considerations as being MORE important NOW than previously. Especially for California teams and particularly the Lakers.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-16-2012, 08:50 AM
  2. Live sex shows in the french quarter??
    By kaiarose in forum Club Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-04-2012, 01:10 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-12-2012, 11:53 AM
  4. Trader on the BBC says Eurozone Market WILL Crash
    By Citychick in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 11:43 PM
  5. 1995 Explorer
    By CallNTC in forum For Sale & Wanted
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-30-2004, 12:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •