TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Trinispougla wrote:Firstly, where you think they got the money to bail out those companies from? Tax payers. As I said, it is evidenced by the fact that so many people lost their homes during this periodand in any case, Trinidad does not control any markets so we can't simply create new money. As I said Spain tax the hell out of their people and layoff like crazy. Trinidad was not affected because we had sound managers of the economy. The price of oil went down to 32 dollars in 2008/2009. By all accounts we should have been in trouble. What you would notice is that while oil went down, gas and hydrocarbons were soaring and at the time, we were the leading exporter of methanol. You really could not live in a first world place. Belgium alone makes their people pay 42 % in taxes. Yuh feel trinidad is Pakasakas?
Trinispougla wrote:And that's the thing, several leading economists have classified this period as a period of stagnation which is very different from a recession. I personally think we are in one due to low oil prices and that we somehow managed to increase gov't spending in the first two quarters of 2015. I think a recession after those major upheavals was inevitable. We also somehow financed a major infrastructure project with our own money which is a major reason why we have arrived in this dark situation
desifemlove wrote:#UNClogic
Cool scene, bro..
be de scene ent that cool..
namely OP advocating Keynesianism......this doh wuk.
Fact is in a recession, consumer confidence inevitably falls. If unemployment rises, businesses lay people off, and then people spend less. this is how it is. Best the state can do is just enable businesses at all times to employ people with less regulations.
but then which government never mentions the prospect of recession? to never do this is irresponsible.
And what was UNC's plan? she had five years to do ting.....she didn't.
it Kams being disingenuous to say it ALL PNM's fault now....she had office for five years, and never has taken any responsibility for dis...but #UNClogic prevails, eh? When you hear in the USA dat Bush's policies ent affecting ting even now? GOPs doh say dat, cos it not how public policy works.....but agiain #UNClogic
ingalook wrote:desifemlove wrote:#UNClogic
Cool scene, bro..
be de scene ent that cool..
namely OP advocating Keynesianism......this doh wuk.
Fact is in a recession, consumer confidence inevitably falls. If unemployment rises, businesses lay people off, and then people spend less. this is how it is. Best the state can do is just enable businesses at all times to employ people with less regulations.
but then which government never mentions the prospect of recession? to never do this is irresponsible.
And what was UNC's plan? she had five years to do ting.....she didn't.
it Kams being disingenuous to say it ALL PNM's fault now....she had office for five years, and never has taken any responsibility for dis...but #UNClogic prevails, eh? When you hear in the USA dat Bush's policies ent affecting ting even now? GOPs doh say dat, cos it not how public policy works.....but agiain #UNClogic
Keynesian Economics ALWAYS works - it has been used to pull the world out of EVERY major financial crisis since the 1930's. After which the economist always returned to their classical economics and preach deregulation and privatization etc. (setting the stage for the next financial crisis)
You are wrong about the recession, it doesn't cause consumer confidence to fall, it is CAUSED by falling consumer confidence - the economy only slows down when consumers reduce spending.
Of course we are in a tougher position than we should be because of the last 5 years of UNC rule (and the 3 years preceding that when the Manning administration was playing with our Harts) but, The Rowley Administration was put there to find solutions, not to point at Kamla dem - lock up who you have to lock up but the PP not in power right now because the People of Trinidad was fed up of their crap.
I am really lost with that Bush part though... you may have to clarify that there
Trinispougla wrote:Ingolok, that is just one opinion. There are several leading economists that view austerity measures as critical to the success Spain and Ireland, countries who enjoy growth today.http://www.worldfinance.com/home/it-wor ... y-measures
One definition of recession is a long painful period of economic adjustment. Austerity falls well into that bracket. Austerity is only painful because people lose jobs but TT isn't anywhere near that point. The fact is, the country is in this position due to some really awful decisions in the last 5-6 years
Trinispougla wrote:http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2015/cr2015_spain_en.pdf- the report on the EC on the success of austerity
Trinispougla wrote:I don't argue with quacks
Trinispougla wrote:Post a link because I can't see anything
Habit7 wrote:What is up with these threads? OP you are asking questions the man addressed on Tuesday. At least counter some of the things he said. You are uninformed and demanding answers from your ignorance.
Another thing is you accusing the govt for things you conjure up in your own mind. Increase MVT and internet shopping tax? The proof for this lies on the shelf between dead man water and what really caused the SOE.
PNM took the economy in 1991 after POS was burnt down and they floated the dollar and started LNG. By the time 2001 come around we were in position to receive the gas boom and the economy grew as one of the fastest in Latin America. Now that the money done again, allow the govt to be prudent and put things in place so that your children can be comfortable and another leader can waste money on laptops for them again.
ingalook wrote:OK 5onDfloor and Habit7
Answer 2 questions:
1. WHO BENEFITS FROM A REDUCTION IN VAT?
2. Why, when we are being fiscally responsible would we deliberately reduce a government revenue stream?
Drop in oil prices rocks producer states, triggers historic tax hike plan in Alaska
By Brooke Singman
Published January 01, 2016
The plunge in oil prices has given a needed break to drivers this holiday season, but it’s causing some real pain in states that rely on oil revenue to fuel their economies and shore up their budgets.
Perhaps nowhere is the impact more pronounced than in Alaska, where Gov. Bill Walker is proposing a raft of new taxes, including the first personal income tax in over three decades, along with budget cuts to offset the damage from the price drop for the oil-reliant state.
“This is a major paradigm shift in how the state of Alaska conducts business,” Walker said in a statement as he announced the plan in December. “That’s because we cannot continue with business as usual and live solely off of our natural resource revenues.”
The price of Brent crude in the United States has fallen below $40 a barrel – more than $30 lower than in May of 2015.
Alaska is a state so reliant on, and accustomed to, big oil revenue that residents share in the profits. In a sign of changing times, Walker’s plan would redirect some of that money to the government itself, making for smaller dividend checks for residents.
According to the Walker administration, the income tax component of the New Sustainable Alaska Plan could generate up to $200 million in revenue a year. Under the plan, the average Alaskan family would pay a rate of roughly 1 percent of their gross income. This would coincide with cuts for everything from obesity-focused education programs to grants for emergency communication.
“Never before has the state faced a deficit so large that we’re draining more than $9 million from savings every day,” Walker said in a statement. “Fortunately those who came before us had the wisdom to set aside money for a rainy day. Well, it’s raining now.”
Given the financial straits of the government, Walker, an independent, has garnered bipartisan support from lawmakers – but still faces reluctance on pursuing an income tax.
In a statement, House Operating Budget Chairman Mark Neuman, a Republican, said Walker “deserves credit for proposing some difficult options for filling our income gap.” Still, he said the plan could use more budget cuts. House Capital Budget Chairman Steve Thompson, also a Republican, echoed that critique and said he doesn’t want residents to pay an income tax “unless it’s absolutely necessary.”
Under the plan, taxes on the oil and other industries also would increase, as would alcohol and tobacco taxes.
Alaska is in a more vulnerable position than a big oil state like Texas, which enjoys a more diverse economy.
Chris Bryan, a spokesman for the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, told Fox News that while the state is projecting lower oil-and-gas tax revenue, “the state’s diverse economy coupled with a large beginning balance and a conservative budget from the 2015 Texas Legislature should allow the state to absorb this reduction in projected revenues.” He said the government is still predicting economic growth in Texas north of 2 percent for fiscal 2016 and 2017.
Yet in North Dakota, where an oil and gas revolution has transformed the state, the drop in prices also threatens to do significant damage.
A recent Moody’s Analytics study reportedly said the state could be nearing a “full-blown recession,” citing the $27 oil price in North Dakota, the lowest since 2008.
According to a Watchdog.org report, North Dakota’s general fund tax revenue was about $152 million, or 8.9 percent, less than forecasted by lawmakers.
“It doesn’t seem like the revenues are going to rebound in the very near term,” state Sen. Gary Lee, a Republican, told Watchdog.org.
But according to Sheila Peterson, director of the Fiscal Management Division of North Dakota’s Office of Management and Budget, the falling oil prices are not crunching the budget as much as they are in Alaska.
“The only direct oil revenue that goes into our general fund is about $300 million out of a $6 billion budget,” Peterson told Fox News. “We still expect to get the $300 million from direct oil taxes.”
According to North Dakota’s OMB, the oil tax composes only 5 percent of North Dakota’s general fund revenue.
North Dakota runs on a 24-month budget, which will be re-evaluated for updated revenue forecasts by mid-to-late January 2016.
“Although revenues are indeed running below forecast right now, it’s not as though we’ve run out of money,” Peterson said. “Depending on what the next forecast shows, we’ll decide if we need to take action, and if so, what those actions will be.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01 ... tcmp=hpbt3
Habit7 wrote:Meanwhile, I guess Alaska should've voted PP, if they did they would not have seen taxes rise.Drop in oil prices rocks producer states, triggers historic tax hike plan in Alaska
By Brooke Singman
Published January 01, 2016
The plunge in oil prices has given a needed break to drivers this holiday season, but it’s causing some real pain in states that rely on oil revenue to fuel their economies and shore up their budgets.
Perhaps nowhere is the impact more pronounced than in Alaska, where Gov. Bill Walker is proposing a raft of new taxes, including the first personal income tax in over three decades, along with budget cuts to offset the damage from the price drop for the oil-reliant state.
“This is a major paradigm shift in how the state of Alaska conducts business,” Walker said in a statement as he announced the plan in December. “That’s because we cannot continue with business as usual and live solely off of our natural resource revenues.”
The price of Brent crude in the United States has fallen below $40 a barrel – more than $30 lower than in May of 2015.
Alaska is a state so reliant on, and accustomed to, big oil revenue that residents share in the profits. In a sign of changing times, Walker’s plan would redirect some of that money to the government itself, making for smaller dividend checks for residents.
According to the Walker administration, the income tax component of the New Sustainable Alaska Plan could generate up to $200 million in revenue a year. Under the plan, the average Alaskan family would pay a rate of roughly 1 percent of their gross income. This would coincide with cuts for everything from obesity-focused education programs to grants for emergency communication.
“Never before has the state faced a deficit so large that we’re draining more than $9 million from savings every day,” Walker said in a statement. “Fortunately those who came before us had the wisdom to set aside money for a rainy day. Well, it’s raining now.”
Given the financial straits of the government, Walker, an independent, has garnered bipartisan support from lawmakers – but still faces reluctance on pursuing an income tax.
In a statement, House Operating Budget Chairman Mark Neuman, a Republican, said Walker “deserves credit for proposing some difficult options for filling our income gap.” Still, he said the plan could use more budget cuts. House Capital Budget Chairman Steve Thompson, also a Republican, echoed that critique and said he doesn’t want residents to pay an income tax “unless it’s absolutely necessary.”
Under the plan, taxes on the oil and other industries also would increase, as would alcohol and tobacco taxes.
Alaska is in a more vulnerable position than a big oil state like Texas, which enjoys a more diverse economy.
Chris Bryan, a spokesman for the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, told Fox News that while the state is projecting lower oil-and-gas tax revenue, “the state’s diverse economy coupled with a large beginning balance and a conservative budget from the 2015 Texas Legislature should allow the state to absorb this reduction in projected revenues.” He said the government is still predicting economic growth in Texas north of 2 percent for fiscal 2016 and 2017.
Yet in North Dakota, where an oil and gas revolution has transformed the state, the drop in prices also threatens to do significant damage.
A recent Moody’s Analytics study reportedly said the state could be nearing a “full-blown recession,” citing the $27 oil price in North Dakota, the lowest since 2008.
According to a Watchdog.org report, North Dakota’s general fund tax revenue was about $152 million, or 8.9 percent, less than forecasted by lawmakers.
“It doesn’t seem like the revenues are going to rebound in the very near term,” state Sen. Gary Lee, a Republican, told Watchdog.org.
But according to Sheila Peterson, director of the Fiscal Management Division of North Dakota’s Office of Management and Budget, the falling oil prices are not crunching the budget as much as they are in Alaska.
“The only direct oil revenue that goes into our general fund is about $300 million out of a $6 billion budget,” Peterson told Fox News. “We still expect to get the $300 million from direct oil taxes.”
According to North Dakota’s OMB, the oil tax composes only 5 percent of North Dakota’s general fund revenue.
North Dakota runs on a 24-month budget, which will be re-evaluated for updated revenue forecasts by mid-to-late January 2016.
“Although revenues are indeed running below forecast right now, it’s not as though we’ve run out of money,” Peterson said. “Depending on what the next forecast shows, we’ll decide if we need to take action, and if so, what those actions will be.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01 ... tcmp=hpbt3
RASC wrote:ingalook wrote:OK 5onDfloor and Habit7
Answer 2 questions:
1. WHO BENEFITS FROM A REDUCTION IN VAT?
2. Why, when we are being fiscally responsible would we deliberately reduce a government revenue stream?
You forget one important fact.
That power lies with the consumer... You make that decision with your wallet. It really is that simple.
zoom rader wrote:Habit7 wrote:Meanwhile, I guess Alaska should've voted PP, if they did they would not have seen taxes rise.Drop in oil prices rocks producer states, triggers historic tax hike plan in Alaska
By Brooke Singman
Published January 01, 2016
The plunge in oil prices has given a needed break to drivers this holiday season, but it’s causing some real pain in states that rely on oil revenue to fuel their economies and shore up their budgets.
Perhaps nowhere is the impact more pronounced than in Alaska, where Gov. Bill Walker is proposing a raft of new taxes, including the first personal income tax in over three decades, along with budget cuts to offset the damage from the price drop for the oil-reliant state.
“This is a major paradigm shift in how the state of Alaska conducts business,” Walker said in a statement as he announced the plan in December. “That’s because we cannot continue with business as usual and live solely off of our natural resource revenues.”
The price of Brent crude in the United States has fallen below $40 a barrel – more than $30 lower than in May of 2015.
Alaska is a state so reliant on, and accustomed to, big oil revenue that residents share in the profits. In a sign of changing times, Walker’s plan would redirect some of that money to the government itself, making for smaller dividend checks for residents.
According to the Walker administration, the income tax component of the New Sustainable Alaska Plan could generate up to $200 million in revenue a year. Under the plan, the average Alaskan family would pay a rate of roughly 1 percent of their gross income. This would coincide with cuts for everything from obesity-focused education programs to grants for emergency communication.
“Never before has the state faced a deficit so large that we’re draining more than $9 million from savings every day,” Walker said in a statement. “Fortunately those who came before us had the wisdom to set aside money for a rainy day. Well, it’s raining now.”
Given the financial straits of the government, Walker, an independent, has garnered bipartisan support from lawmakers – but still faces reluctance on pursuing an income tax.
In a statement, House Operating Budget Chairman Mark Neuman, a Republican, said Walker “deserves credit for proposing some difficult options for filling our income gap.” Still, he said the plan could use more budget cuts. House Capital Budget Chairman Steve Thompson, also a Republican, echoed that critique and said he doesn’t want residents to pay an income tax “unless it’s absolutely necessary.”
Under the plan, taxes on the oil and other industries also would increase, as would alcohol and tobacco taxes.
Alaska is in a more vulnerable position than a big oil state like Texas, which enjoys a more diverse economy.
Chris Bryan, a spokesman for the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, told Fox News that while the state is projecting lower oil-and-gas tax revenue, “the state’s diverse economy coupled with a large beginning balance and a conservative budget from the 2015 Texas Legislature should allow the state to absorb this reduction in projected revenues.” He said the government is still predicting economic growth in Texas north of 2 percent for fiscal 2016 and 2017.
Yet in North Dakota, where an oil and gas revolution has transformed the state, the drop in prices also threatens to do significant damage.
A recent Moody’s Analytics study reportedly said the state could be nearing a “full-blown recession,” citing the $27 oil price in North Dakota, the lowest since 2008.
According to a Watchdog.org report, North Dakota’s general fund tax revenue was about $152 million, or 8.9 percent, less than forecasted by lawmakers.
“It doesn’t seem like the revenues are going to rebound in the very near term,” state Sen. Gary Lee, a Republican, told Watchdog.org.
But according to Sheila Peterson, director of the Fiscal Management Division of North Dakota’s Office of Management and Budget, the falling oil prices are not crunching the budget as much as they are in Alaska.
“The only direct oil revenue that goes into our general fund is about $300 million out of a $6 billion budget,” Peterson told Fox News. “We still expect to get the $300 million from direct oil taxes.”
According to North Dakota’s OMB, the oil tax composes only 5 percent of North Dakota’s general fund revenue.
North Dakota runs on a 24-month budget, which will be re-evaluated for updated revenue forecasts by mid-to-late January 2016.
“Although revenues are indeed running below forecast right now, it’s not as though we’ve run out of money,” Peterson said. “Depending on what the next forecast shows, we’ll decide if we need to take action, and if so, what those actions will be.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01 ... tcmp=hpbt3
Alaska citizens will get value for taxes paid.
In Trin you still have to pass through red tape and unproductive PNM public servants that always looking for a bribe.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests
