News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #150 on: January 14, 2011, 12:40:31 PM »
Paul...the flip side of mandatory expenditures on Social Security is the mandatory funding via payroll tax...SS does not add to the Federal debt...so on one hand you can say its 25% or more of the budget, but it is also over 40% of the revenue coming into the goverment.
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #151 on: January 14, 2011, 12:42:59 PM »
Paul...the flip side of mandatory expenditures on Social Security is the mandatory funding via payroll tax...SS does not add to the Federal debt...so on one hand you can say its 25% or more of the budget, but it is also over 40% of the revenue coming into the goverment.

thanks Craig..I am obviously no expert on these matters...


...but i am so sick of people saying we  need to cut taxes without spelling out any specifics on the budget!
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #152 on: January 14, 2011, 12:47:35 PM »
Paul,

Agreed.  It's sad when the Pentagon considers a 10% cap on the increase in expenditures as a spending cut....
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #154 on: January 14, 2011, 02:50:22 PM »
"U.S. prices rise as global inflation heats up"

http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/14/news/economy/cpi_inflation/index.htm


"Most of that increase was due to gasoline prices, which surged 8.5% in December alone"


Social Security going bust...

http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2011/jan/11/112026/social-security-going-bust/
« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 02:55:14 PM by Craig Edgmand »

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #155 on: January 14, 2011, 03:08:54 PM »
Craig Edgmand -

"Social Security going bust..."

Who is Norman Pallot of Brooksville? When did he become an authority on the financial structure of the Social Security system?
When did Letter to the Editor of the Tampa Bay Tribune become an authoritative source?

Just curious!

DT

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #156 on: January 14, 2011, 03:21:07 PM »

No freaking idea...

Its the Internet where everyone is an expert.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #157 on: January 14, 2011, 03:23:55 PM »
"Its the Internet where everyone is an expert."

Craig -

And I just thought it was this chat board! (smiley face with wink, if I was able to post one)

DT

Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #158 on: January 14, 2011, 03:40:34 PM »
The great bulk of the Fed Budget is made up of , I believe, the military, interest on the debt, Soc. Sec, and Medicare and Medicaid

"discretionary" spending on other items is what , 20% or so?

yet often I hear lets cut the size of the government to reduce our debt

that is small-fry stuff...until we tackle the items we spend the most on little if any progress can be made

I live in IL, and my taxes just went up 66%.....that might be a bit too high /too fast imho, but how else is the stat supposed to get out of its deadbeat status/its $15 Billion in debt?  of course i'm not happy that past politicians let the situation get this bad...of course our recent track record of electing governors in Illinois is dubious to say the least...

generally speaking, I think the anti-tax rhetoric has gone way too far

For the 2010 fiscal year:

Total Receipts

Individual income                  $899
Corporate Income                $191
Social Insurance                    $865
Federal Reserve                    $76
Other                                  $131

  Total receipts                     $2,162

Total Outlays

Defense                             $667
Social Security                     $696
Medicare                             $450
Medicaid                             $273
Unemployment benefits        $162
Other                                $1,048
Net interest on debt           $228
TARP                                -$108
Payments to GSEs               $40

  Total outlays                    $3,456

Deficit                               $1,294

So in 2010 Military, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Net Interest accounted for 107% of total receipts.  I am not sure of the exact accounting but it appears that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid expenses were $1,419 while the Social Insurance receipts were $865, so there was a social insurance deficit of $554 billion.  Unfortunately Craig Sweet's point is incorrect - Social Insurance does represent 40% of total receipts but Social Insurance outlays represent 65% of total receipts.

Total receipts are roughly in line with receipts from 2005 while outlays have increased close to $1 trillion, $984 billion to be precise.  So do we have an expense problem or a tax problem?  If you aren't vigilant about the tax side the government can always find ways to spend money it has and money it doesn't have.  The problem is only going to get worse.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 03:51:40 PM by Rob Bice »
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #159 on: January 14, 2011, 04:37:12 PM »
Craig E....that piece from the Tampa online paper is chock full of misinformation and lies...Social Security will not be bankrupt in 2037....currently it will be paying out 100% up until 2037 and then it will payout 75%...how could it pay out 75% if it was banlrupt?

The current trust has over $1.7 trillion in it...a lot of that is government backed IOU's .....the same IOU's that back our borrowing around the world...

Currently you are taxed on the first $106K of income...you pay zero tax on any income you earn beyond $106K....it has been suggested that this "cap" be increased...and it has been suggested that the retirement age be raised. Do some research on life expectancy...it has increased in this country because fewer of us die in the first 7 years of life...not necessarily because we are adding years on the other end...fewer deaths at the beginning of life add to the over all average

But here is the kicker for me...lets say I will be 65 in 7 years... If the age that I can first draw Social Security is raised from 65 to 70 I will have to work longer. Is that a good thing? Isnt it in reality a cut in my benefit?
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #161 on: January 14, 2011, 04:41:56 PM »
Craig E....that piece from the Tampa online paper is chock full of misinformation and lies...Social Security will not be bankrupt in 2037....currently it will be paying out 100% up until 2037 and then it will payout 75%...how could it pay out 75% if it was banlrupt?

The current trust has over $1.7 trillion in it...a lot of that is government backed IOU's .....the same IOU's that back our borrowing around the world...

Currently you are taxed on the first $106K of income...you pay zero tax on any income you earn beyond $106K....it has been suggested that this "cap" be increased...and it has been suggested that the retirement age be raised. Do some research on life expectancy...it has increased in this country because fewer of us die in the first 7 years of life...not necessarily because we are adding years on the other end...fewer deaths at the beginning of life add to the over all average

But here is the kicker for me...lets say I will be 65 in 7 years... If the age that I can first draw Social Security is raised from 65 to 70 I will have to work longer. Is that a good thing? Isnt it in reality a cut in my benefit?

Kinda sux when they want to take something from you- huh........
rather than those anonymous rich guys....
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #162 on: January 14, 2011, 05:11:48 PM »
The idea of the Social Security Trust Fund sounds nice but what does it really mean when it lends its assets to the government?

I net out a little money every month and put it into my Vacation Trust and I also promise myself to take a vacation this year.  Expenses are a little heavy so I am going to lend my Vacation Trust money to my everyday expenses account.  So my Vacation Trust now has a little money and an IOU from some other account.  Vacation time.  I guess that IOU has to get paid to my Vacation account.  I guess I'll just issue more debt!  But my Vacation Trust is fine.
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #163 on: January 14, 2011, 05:30:25 PM »
Craig S,

   Maybe you like this one better... we already paid out more that we took in in 2012.

   http://www.advisorone.com/article/geithner-social-security-payments-exceed-revenue-1st-time

   The trust fund will be blown through in about 13 years beginning in 2024... that's really not very far away.

   However, of the entitlements Social Security is the easiest to fix.

  
« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 05:32:14 PM by Craig Edgmand »

Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #164 on: January 14, 2011, 05:41:03 PM »
Craig S,

   Maybe you like this one better... we already paid out more that we took in in 2012.

   http://www.advisorone.com/article/geithner-social-security-payments-exceed-revenue-1st-time

   The trust fund will be blown through in about 13 years beginning in 2024... that's really not very far away.

   However, of the entitlements Social Security is the easiest to fix.

  

While I agree with your concerns, the linked article says that we will start drawing down the Trust Fund in 2024 and by 2037 the Trust Fund will no longer have any assets.

Yes, Social Security should be the easiest one to fix.

One interesting point.  At the time Social Security was created the average life expectancy was 61.7.  Life expectancy is now 77.8 but the 65 starting age remains the same.
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #165 on: January 14, 2011, 05:46:10 PM »

I did say beginning in 2024...  at least I thought I did.

For me the  starting age is 67 for full benefits.

You either got to raise revenues or cut benefits. To soak the rich we could do both, eliminate the cap and then cut benefits to those who make too much money. :)


Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #166 on: January 14, 2011, 05:47:37 PM »

I did say beginning in 2024...  at least I thought I did.

For me the  starting age is 67 for full benefits.

You either got to raise revenues or cut benefits. To soak the rich we could do both, eliminate the cap and then cut benefits to those who make too much money. :)



I see what you mean, 13 years beginning in 2024.  I'm a little slow late on a Friday!!!!
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #167 on: January 14, 2011, 09:23:09 PM »
 I just picked back up a book I got in 2000 called "Devil Take The Hindmost" by Edward Chancellor. It is a history of financial speculation. I went right to the section called "The crash of 1929". The author discusses the various arguments about what caused the Great Depression and whether or not the crash was the chief cause. He did not take a position himself; he just laid out the various arguments.

   However, he quoted  from  "Only Yesterday" by Frederick Lewis Allen which was published in 1931. Allen saw the Depression "as a profound psychological reaction from the exuberance of 1929". He quotes further from the book..

      " Prosperity is more than an economic condition; it is a state of mind.....With the Big Bull Market gone and prosperity going, Americans were soon to find themselves living in an altered world which called for new adjustments, new ideas, new habits of thought, and a new order of values. "

    It seems quite clear to me that our great bull market ended in the euphoria of 1999/2000. We managed to stave off the economic effects by the real estate bubble. This enabled us to live a few more years beyond our means. Incomes could no longer support our lifestyle; asset inflation kept us going. That ended in a financial meltdown.

   Clearly, if the gov't throws the kitchen sink at the problem it can slow it down. So, we are now in the inevitable contra trend move up in economic statistics . But, the economy is still on life support. Reinhart and Rogoff in their definitive history of financial booms and busts and sovereign debt concerns speak to how bank crises become sovereign debt crises. So, when will the economy stand on its own when the gov't is so involved?

     Investing seems to have virtually disappeared; we are left with a speculative environment supported by the Fed's zero interest rate policy. The vicious snapback in profits is best explained by the trading profits of banks and the cutting to the bone of other businesses.

   The Great Depression saw much more dramatic increases in gdp than we have had. It is all part of the process.

   The main problem is we are depressed. We can't continue to deny that an economy that is losing wealth can advance. We must contract. Consumption is 70% of gdp and it hit a wall when households reached the limits of their borrowing.

     As for the chart that shows the widening between the rich and poor it could easily be that the rich are keeping their wealth and the middle class squandered theirs on the pipedream of ever rising leveraged assets. All I believe is that it is not good for the markets , the economy, or the political environment when this condition exists. I recently ran into an investment guy I worked with who comes from one of the most recognizable rich families in Philly. It got me to thinking about how the rich invest. I believe they hold on forever and live off of the dividends. It's the little guy who gets suckered into the idea that stocks can make them rich from ever increasing prices. Even now I believe the great majority of investors believe that stocks always go up if you just wait!

    Another similarity between the roaring 20's and our finance bubble is the heightened percent of income earned by the financial industry.  Much of the money made in this industry in boom times comes from those with little skin in the game . It can hardly be called "capitalism". I think we should do everything we can to encourage entrepreneurship but little to encourage croupiership. If mortgages could only be securitized in a covered bond fashion where the underwriter held a decent percentage I doubt the subprime mess would have happened.

     Then, as now, the great unwashed bought into a dream that you could have something for nothing.

    I expect this depression to last a long time because institutions like the Fed and our federal government will do anything to avoid short term pain.

   Niall Ferguson, another financial historian, said that the limits to federal borrowing aren't known until it is too late and that he didn't recommend the U.S. find out its limits.

      The accumulation of household and government debt to a level which exceeds our income in an economy that is getting older at the very least will stunt growth for years to come.  The effort at inflating our way out worked for about 1/2 of the debt after WWII . There is a heated argument now as to whether this inflating is possible  meaning deflation will take over or even hyperinflation .  Wow !what a choice.

     I know people always say "we will find a way". But, if you examine history there seems to be only difficult solutions for these credit depressions and the way we have decided to get out  so far is rooted in how we got into the mess in the first place! We think those who got us here can get us out if we just give them time.

    So I imagine the golf clubs will experience times at least as tough as the Great Depression.

    





« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 09:34:19 PM by mike_malone »
AKA Mayday

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #168 on: January 14, 2011, 09:32:43 PM »
First of all....the Social Security Trust Fund will not be BROKE...EMPTY.... in 2037...or 2041....iit will only be able to meet 75% of its obligation...not 100% as it currently pays out.

Second...like I said...look into "life expectancy" and you will find that regardless of when you were born, if you lived into your teens you would probably live well into your 70's....the "gain" in life expectancy is coming from the decline in childhood deaths....more people are making it into their teens and thus into their 70's  and 80's....

In my opinion, the misinformation about Social Security is being generated by those who have never like it and want to get their hot little hands on that $2 trillion dollars that is sitting there. They have done this with private pensions, they have done this our health care, they have done this with our public utilities....
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

Paul Stephenson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #169 on: January 15, 2011, 12:03:22 AM »

I don't know anyone who objects to Social Security.
I think one of the complaints has to do with the inverted pyramid problem where the burden for funding for more and more people is falling on fewer and fewer people[/color]


That's demographics at work more so than fiscal policy.  Those complainers should go out there and start making babies at greater than replacement levels.  ;D


Paul Stephenson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #170 on: January 15, 2011, 12:14:24 AM »
Patrick,

I have no doubt that I'd be successful in Mississippi or Louisiana, since hard work, long hours and working smart pay off no matter where you are.  In fact, I have clients in Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi

[/color]



Are there really no geniuses in the slums of Mumbai?  Other than the one who was lucky enough to win the game show?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #171 on: January 15, 2011, 11:15:56 AM »

I don't know anyone who objects to Social Security.
I think one of the complaints has to do with the inverted pyramid problem where the burden for funding for more and more people is falling on fewer and fewer people[/color]


That's demographics at work more so than fiscal policy.  Those complainers should go out there and start making babies at greater than replacement levels.  ;D


Paul, that only works if those babies are contributors and not users (;;)




Patrick_Mucci

Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #172 on: January 15, 2011, 11:18:02 AM »
Getting back on topic, will the current environment foster a "collective" approach to maintainance costs in terms of equipment purchases and sharing ?

Will golf return to a more rugged look, or will the demand for immaculate grooming continue ?

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #173 on: January 15, 2011, 02:14:05 PM »

Getting back on topic, will the current environment foster a "collective" approach to maintainance costs in terms of equipment purchases and sharing ?



I tried this about 5 years ago--getting a few local clubs to go in together and purchase in bulk sand,chemicals,fertilizer,etc.At the time,the response was lukewarm from the Supers (logistical issues) but a big hit with each club's treasurer.Nothing ever happened as there wasn't any compelling reason to do it back then.

I think it's time to revisit the issue.

Sharing of any equipment is always going to be a problem due to scheduling.Plus,nobody wants the blame when it breaks at their place.

Matt_Ward

Re: If the current economic environment continues, will
« Reply #174 on: January 15, 2011, 02:31:49 PM »
When I see a place like the Grand Strand with 100 or so courses from Brunswick County in NC stretching to Pawleys Island in SC -- I have to wonder if nothing less than a 20-25% attrition rate will be needed in order for the others to really survive.

Discretionary income is still available but too many courses are priced beyond what they provide. Unfortunately, most courses think they have something to offer golfers -- more often than not, far too many have glomed on to those few that are exceptional and have depended upon spillover traffic to be successful.

Such spillover traffic is not present and frankly the USA has too many courses for too few players -- I remember reading a NGF brochure whereby the top 5-10% of the players are fronting the rounds for nearly 50% of the total.