The good and bad economic estimates

[Gil Dobie]

I've heard some people say 20 percent unemployment, 5 years of a bad economy on the other hand I've heard the economy will recover towards the end of this year. It's probably somewhere in the middle. We are looking at putting our house on the market in March and downsizing. right now paying close to 65 percent of our gross incomes in taxes, income, property, sales combined. Hopefully get into a smaller home with less taxes. What have others heard?

[Col Hogan]

Guess it depends on where you are...here in the DC area, I'm hearing unemployment in the 6% range and the economy slowly recovering spring 2010...

We want to sell our house, too...problem is, not much real estate is moving right now and I can't get what I owe...so we'll hang on a while longer before leaving...

I got a job, so that's not an issue...

[travelinman67]

Debated announcing this on it's own thread, but I'll keep it low key.

Right after the election I made a decision to scale back, and in December took myself off the road and eliminated my position. Still have stake in the company and product, but have gone "private", no longer work for the company...in effect, Gone Galt. Like you, Gil, I was paying well over 60% of gross in taxes...which is simply absurd. To think that Obama is considering RAISING taxes is beyond ridiculous. I refuse to work around the clock to fund conversion of our democracy to socialism.

I have a friend who is a true "off the grid" agrarian (no utility services, raise virtually all their own food [barter with other farmers for products they don't grow], own everything they possess, operate cash-only, run zero-sum farming enterprise, beginning this next year, will begin growing soybeans and have already built and tested their own biodiesel processor, and on and on) who has opened my eyes to the lifestyle of self-sustainability (no, I am not talking about environmental "self-sustainability", this is about self-sufficiency...living without assistance/support/dependency on outside services). While there really isn't a way to practically take oneself entirely "off the grid", the methods are viable and small steps can implemented to reduce one's "tax" footprint. I've tossed some numbers around and believe I can cut my taxes in half...but that won't come without some sacrifices. I will not be living the "champagne" lifestyle any longer, and will have to minimize "major" purchases. I will never buy property again in CA, and what property I do buy will probably be on a cash basis. I actually started this "process" a couple of years back, and have minimized my dependency on outside services, and will simply continue to do so, partly in preparation for the oncoming economic decline I feel is still facing the U.S., and partly because I'm simply sick of paying over 60% of my earnings in taxes and fees to survive.
It is mind-boggling that fed/state/local governments can demand so much in taxes from it's citizens, then turn around and waste that money on "frillish" projects and social experiments, that, even when identified as being wasteful failures, are allowed to continue and often even expanded. Most state legislatures would be improved by scaling back their legislative sessions to part-time, maybe to three, two-month sessions each year, and requiring public posting of an NGO budget impact review on every new legislative proposal (many allege to do so, but the reality is the information provided to the public is, as a rule, heavily summarized or redacted to remove the devil in the details).
Going back to the original essence of this thread, I do not see ANY of the proposals by either the Bush or Obama administrations as solving the U.S. economic problems in the long-term. The fundamental cause of our economic problem, trade imabalance, has been generated by the U.S.'s move away from a high GDP nation, towards a pure consumerism based economy. The imposition of "old money" philosophies, making money by managing money, without investing in GDP growth, has overtaken the boardrooms of American business: One only need examine the root of all the recent corporate failures to find verification. While I could rant about the impediments to returning to a manufactured hardgoods/agrarian economy, regardless of the method, the motives are the same...to generate bureaucratic mandates for the purpose of feeding off of producers' revenues, and ultimately inhibit GDP (industrialism), which has been "deemed" as harmful to socialistic goals.

Don't agree...?

Please explain what long-term remedies are being provided by the proposed tax & spend programs.

In 5 years, how will GDP recovery have been advanced by converting private investment to government programs? In 10 years?

If Obama is serious, that new position of Chief Performance Officer will be mandated with specific targets for cutting government bureaucracy...hopefully, in the range of 25-35%, and in instances where the agency's existence is mandated by law...identify the mechanism, forward to Congress with a request to eliminate the mandates.

Finally, before any further discussion of the $7 Trillion Cap & Trade tax & spend bill is to take place, Congress should consider shifting focus away from every "quality of life" bill that crosses their desk and instead focus on requiring every bill to substantiate a positive GDP growth impact, SUPPORTED BY REAL, "HARD" FINANCIAL REVIEW, not lofty, pontificated notions that "...it will create millions of jobs in the future..." as has become the common practice for most boondoggles (often to pitch "go green" policies) over the past decade. Political policy pontifications need to be supported with real calculated costs, reviewed by NGO's, and ranked with other bills to determine which creates the greatest growth to GDP.

...my two cents worth...

[Appaholic]

WOW! I admire you for making this decision. My wife and I feel the same way (although she is suckling from the gevernment teet....hell, if you;re gonna pay state taxes....). We have been interested in building an earth ship to live off of the grid. We have our drawings and estimates, but, quite frankly, cannot afford to purchase the land in a close enough vicinity to my job to avoid an hour drive and/or building next to a junk yard due to a lack of zoning in this area. We may have to build as a retirement home when commuting isn't as important....good luck TMan and keep me informed to the progress....I am sincerely interested to see how this works out....

[travelinman67]

WOW! I admire you for making this decision. My wife and I feel the same way (although she is suckling from the gevernment teet....hell, if you;re gonna pay state taxes....). We have been interested in building an earth ship to live off of the grid. We have our drawings and estimates, but, quite frankly, cannot afford to purchase the land in a close enough vicinity to my job to avoid an hour drive and/or building next to a junk yard due to a lack of zoning in this area. We may have to build as a retirement home when commuting isn't as important....good luck TMan and keep me informed to the progress....I am sincerely interested to see how this works out....

I'm not attempting to go entirely off the grid, but am doing my damndest to minimize any consumption that generates a tax. Just got tired of govt. agencies treating citizens like adversaries or acting like feudal overlords. This is still our country. You made a good observation about dependency to location. The person I know who's off the grid lives 9 mi. from the town where they both still own a business (again, something they endeavor to manage with a zero-sum tax footprint). In their case, it's not just about displeasure with govt. but as a demonstration that rural Americans who only receive a fraction of the benefits of govt. constructed/maintained infrastructure systems, govt. regulated health care, etc...yet generally contribute to GDP at far higher percentages than urban and suburban Americans, should not be taxed at the same rate as urban/suburban citizens/businesses. I've heard them tell countless stories of overbearing govt. bureaucrats who stalk rural residents looking for "violations" merely for the purpose of justifying the agencies existence. Top of the list, unfortunately, is the Forestry Service, DFG, BoR and local water agencies. BoR even went so far as to suggest a rain water/cistern collection system they had built on their 30 acre parcel, violated BoR water rights. And in yet another local water agency contact, they had submitted a permit to modify a creek channel where it passes under an existing bridge, not to divert for beneficial use, merely to improve channel flow so they could reinforce the bridge and make it resistant to wash-out. That was 8 years ago... Finally after no response despite numerous attempts to get a permit, the state passed a bill this year which enabled water agencies to pursue reimbursment from local landowners for maintenance of waterways as they effect local infrastructure, i.e., the bridge in question. Now, the water agency has been contacting them for the past 6 months requesting they identify the bridge situation as being an "at risk" project, so the agency can move in, complete the repairs/modifications, then involuntarily force the landowners to pay. Repeated attempts by the landowners to discuss the matter with the water agency have been met with the "stonewall" response that "the law is on the water district's side, so there's nothing to discuss"...

...last time we spoke, they had retained an attorney.

This is just another in a long, long, long list of bureaucracy/regulatory agencies gone awry. And quite frankly, I've just grown sick of it.

BTW, Appa, the "self sufficiency" method is something I've proscribed to since my early 20's...probably emanated from growing up during the Cold War...living with the prospect of a nuclear armageddon. Both men and women, as well as married couples, IMHO, should minimally "have a plan" for self sufficiency...and develop the disciplines required to survive sans the govt. tete.

[Appaholic]

WOW! I admire you for making this decision. My wife and I feel the same way (although she is suckling from the gevernment teet....hell, if you;re gonna pay state taxes....). We have been interested in building an earth ship to live off of the grid. We have our drawings and estimates, but, quite frankly, cannot afford to purchase the land in a close enough vicinity to my job to avoid an hour drive and/or building next to a junk yard due to a lack of zoning in this area. We may have to build as a retirement home when commuting isn't as important....good luck TMan and keep me informed to the progress....I am sincerely interested to see how this works out....

I'm not attempting to go entirely off the grid, but am doing my damndest to minimize any consumption that generates a tax. Just got tired of govt. agencies treating citizens like adversaries or acting like feudal overlords. This is still our country. You made a good observation about dependency to location. The person I know who's off the grid lives 9 mi. from the town where they both still own a business (again, something they endeavor to manage with a zero-sum tax footprint). In their case, it's not just about displeasure with govt. but as a demonstration that rural Americans who only receive a fraction of the benefits of govt. constructed/maintained infrastructure systems, govt. regulated health care, etc...yet generally contribute to GDP at far higher percentages than urban and suburban Americans, should not be taxed at the same rate as urban/suburban citizens/businesses. I've heard them tell countless stories of overbearing govt. bureaucrats who stalk rural residents looking for "violations" merely for the purpose of justifying the agencies existence. Top of the list, unfortunately, is the Forestry Service, DFG, BoR and local water agencies. BoR even went so far as to suggest a rain water/cistern collection system they had built on their 30 acre parcel, violated BoR water rights. And in yet another local water agency contact, they had submitted a permit to modify a creek channel where it passes under an existing bridge, not to divert for beneficial use, merely to improve channel flow so they could reinforce the bridge and make it resistant to wash-out. That was 8 years ago... Finally after no response despite numerous attempts to get a permit, the state passed a bill this year which enabled water agencies to pursue reimbursment from local landowners for maintenance of waterways as they effect local infrastructure, i.e., the bridge in question. Now, the water agency has been contacting them for the past 6 months requesting they identify the bridge situation as being an "at risk" project, so the agency can move in, complete the repairs/modifications, then involuntarily force the landowners to pay. Repeated attempts by the landowners to discuss the matter with the water agency have been met with the "stonewall" response that "the law is on the water district's side, so there's nothing to discuss"...

...last time we spoke, they had retained an attorney.

This is just another in a long, long, long list of bureaucracy/regulatory agencies gone awry. And quite frankly, I've just grown sick of it.

BTW, Appa, the "self sufficiency" method is something I've proscribed to since my early 20's...probably emanated from growing up during the Cold War...living with the prospect of a nuclear armageddon. Both men and women, as well as married couples, IMHO, should minimally "have a plan" for self sufficiency...and develop the disciplines required to survive sans the govt. tete.

I'm with ya, T. My main reason for striving to go "off the grid"/self-suffeciency route is for the exact reasons you describe above...Ther less interaction I have with government/regulatory agencies/monopolized utility companies, the happier I'll be and the safer they'll be long term...

[Grizalltheway]

WOW! I admire you for making this decision. My wife and I feel the same way (although she is suckling from the gevernment teet....hell, if you;re gonna pay state taxes....). We have been interested in building an earth ship to live off of the grid. We have our drawings and estimates, but, quite frankly, cannot afford to purchase the land in a close enough vicinity to my job to avoid an hour drive and/or building next to a junk yard due to a lack of zoning in this area. We may have to build as a retirement home when commuting isn't as important....good luck TMan and keep me informed to the progress....I am sincerely interested to see how this works out....

I'm not attempting to go entirely off the grid, but am doing my damndest to minimize any consumption that generates a tax. Just got tired of govt. agencies treating citizens like adversaries or acting like feudal overlords. This is still our country. You made a good observation about dependency to location. The person I know who's off the grid lives 9 mi. from the town where they both still own a business (again, something they endeavor to manage with a zero-sum tax footprint). In their case, it's not just about displeasure with govt. but as a demonstration that rural Americans who only receive a fraction of the benefits of govt. constructed/maintained infrastructure systems, govt. regulated health care, etc...yet generally contribute to GDP at far higher percentages than urban and suburban Americans, should not be taxed at the same rate as urban/suburban citizens/businesses. I've heard them tell countless stories of overbearing govt. bureaucrats who stalk rural residents looking for "violations" merely for the purpose of justifying the agencies existence. Top of the list, unfortunately, is the Forestry Service, DFG, BoR and local water agencies. BoR even went so far as to suggest a rain water/cistern collection system they had built on their 30 acre parcel, violated BoR water rights. And in yet another local water agency contact, they had submitted a permit to modify a creek channel where it passes under an existing bridge, not to divert for beneficial use, merely to improve channel flow so they could reinforce the bridge and make it resistant to wash-out. That was 8 years ago... Finally after no response despite numerous attempts to get a permit, the state passed a bill this year which enabled water agencies to pursue reimbursment from local landowners for maintenance of waterways as they effect local infrastructure, i.e., the bridge in question. Now, the water agency has been contacting them for the past 6 months requesting they identify the bridge situation as being an "at risk" project, so the agency can move in, complete the repairs/modifications, then involuntarily force the landowners to pay. Repeated attempts by the landowners to discuss the matter with the water agency have been met with the "stonewall" response that "the law is on the water district's side, so there's nothing to discuss"...

...last time we spoke, they had retained an attorney.

This is just another in a long, long, long list of bureaucracy/regulatory agencies gone awry. And quite frankly, I've just grown sick of it.

BTW, Appa, the "self sufficiency" method is something I've proscribed to since my early 20's...probably emanated from growing up during the Cold War...living with the prospect of a nuclear armageddon. Both men and women, as well as married couples, IMHO, should minimally "have a plan" for self sufficiency...and develop the disciplines required to survive sans the govt. tete.

I really don't know the ins and outs of water rights, but it seems to me like they could make a case that that would violate them. The rainwater they're collecting would end up back in the ground fairly quickly if they weren't doing it. Yes, it's nitpicking, and they're probably doing it just to be azzholes, but it does have a scientific basis...

[travelinman67]

I really don't know the ins and outs of water rights, but it seems to me like they could make a case that that would violate them. The rainwater they're collecting would end up back in the ground fairly quickly if they weren't doing it. Yes, it's nitpicking, and they're probably doing it just to be azzholes, but it does have a scientific basis...

That little incident prompted one of them to run for the water board. When they didn't win, they contacted the state and was selected to sit on a regional water use panel that selects watershed projects throughout their state for study. Once on the panel, they found that much of the data/research that the state was using was bogus, and since then, they've uncovered numerous instances of falsified research by third party NGO's employed by water districts. Needless to say, that person, and the panel, are pretty much hated by the private geotechnical/hydrologic firms commonly employed by water districts. And, as a side effect, the petty bureaucrats/enforcement units employed by their local water district have discontinued harassing many of the locals for "petty" stuff like rural (mountain) water collection.
And yes, you're right, there was no "violation". The local district was just "testing" them as they have a small creek that runs through their property, which feeds several "cattle" parcels. Some of them "cattle folk" don't want anyone using any water upstream, and since they established their farm about 10 yrs ago, upstream from the cattle, the cattle folk/water district have been consistently battling them. Things slowed down considerably when the husband inherited a large estate, and had the means to employ an attorney to pursue an aggressive stance in dealing with their "neighbors".

...and life rolls on...

[D1B]

Tman, deny it all you want, but you're turning into an environmentalist. Looks like I finally got through to you. You are welcome.

[travelinman67]

Tman, deny it all you want, but you're turning into an environmentalist. Looks like I finally got through to you. You are welcome.

Your reading comprehension is getting even worse. Self sufficiency does not equate to environmental sustainability or friendliness. Go back and read again.

Nor (and I know this is going to take more than a few brain cells for you to understand, so think hard) does "going off the grid" equate to being environmentally friendly. Most folks who go off the grid are bigger polluters than those "on the grid". Use of non-engineered septic or simply dumping raw sewage, wood for heating, and disposal of non-treated gray water for starters...having said that, there are methods to go off the grid that ARE environmentally friendly, however, most are very expensive and not viable for the "average" person. Furthermore, issues of survivability as the person(s) age is a serious problem, as those who can no longer do physical labor, become entirely dependent on others...which, unless the elder has accumulated barter-goods for later use, becomes a liability to their friends and neighbors.

Oh, yeah...

In most cases, the notion of going entirely off grid is only a utopian fantasy akin to most of the "save the world" dribble espoused by the hippy/baby boomers.

...if you really want to see how environmentally friendly entire communities of "off the grid" residents live, go visit your homies adopted country, China...there's plenty of "environmentally friendly" off the grid communities...



...just gotta be sure to dump your sewage far enough downstream so it doesn't get back up into your fresh water source...

[D1B]

Tman, deny it all you want, but you're turning into an environmentalist. Looks like I finally got through to you. You are welcome.

Your reading comprehension is getting even worse. Self sufficiency does not equate to environmental sustainability or friendliness. Go back and read again.

Nope, too long and boring. Welcome to the world of Mother Jones. PM me your address and I purchase a subscription for you.