Should the IMF be bailed out ?

Christine Lagarde: IMF may need billions in extra funding - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8788223/Christine-Lagarde-IMF-may-need-billions-in-extra-funding.html)

You see if we don't bailout the IMF then they can't bailout the EU states too big to fail... who in turn would have to make changes in their nanny states if they didn't get the IMF bailout .

Sorry IMF the US piggy bank is empty . Ask the Chinese to stop building their blue water navy... Maybe they can contribute to the IMF bailout with the surplus US debt they are holding . Or maybe Bernanke will jack up the QEIII printing presses to create more devalued dollars .

No, the IMF is FULL of WAY overpaid people, with excessive benefits. Most get fully reimbursed for private schools and colleges for their kids, pay no income taxes (forgeigners are exempt and citizens get reimbursed for what taxes they do pay. In many cases they also get allowances for live in housekeeping staffs.

I can go on and on too... I know a lot of people that work there and what they get. $10-20K a month pay is considered on the low end.

Don't bail the IMF out it is the most destructive economic device wrecking havoc on the economies of poor and failing nations.

I know a few countries that can stand some restructuring. Be nice if the Euro had one system of finance instead of 6 or 7.

Tal it would be nice if it were a perfect world but it isn't. Common markets have their difficulties particularly if the countries are at different stages of development. It was a great idea for the original nations and if it had stopped there ~ however greed being what it is and empires always form.

Back to the IMF which of course is a horse of a different colour, a way of keeping the poor poor and the rich nations on top. As to restructuring, it should start with the rich nations. The US is obviously long overdue

Yeah we could do with less progressivism .

yeah we could do with less progressivism .
I like being progressive (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/progressive):

a : of, relating to, or characterized by progress
b : making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities
c : of, relating to, or constituting an educational theory marked by emphasis on the individual child, informality of classroom procedure, and encouragement of self-expression

It beats being regressive.

Gee... There is nothing progressive about redistribution of wealth. Its just mob mentality run ammok.

Particularly since people really began to understand what Liberals really stood for... like changing a name changes anything. Remember Bill Clinton and "it depends on what the definition of "is" is."

If a word doesn't fit what they want it to mean... they dream up a new definition.

If a word doesn't fit what they want it to mean....they dream up a new definition.
I know, that's what conservatives did to the word "progressive".

Nope... The democrats are the ones that did it to that just like they did to the word Liberal. Gee, why aren't the lefties proud to call themselves liberal these days? Is it because they can't pretend it means something other than what they turned it into?

A leopard can't change its spots.

Nope......The democrats are the ones that did it to that just like they did to the word Liberal.
Oh I know that, here's some info:
Progressive Democrats of America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Democrats_of_America)

Nowhere does it say "wealth redistribution". You made that up of course.

Specific policies that fall under the category of economic socialism include: progressive taxes and income redistribution aimed at reducing inequalities of wealth,


The economic theory that underpins most of the policies listed above is Keynesian economics. However, many organizations that promote economic progressivism can be characterized as anti-capitalist and include principles and policies based on Marxism, Libertarian Socialism, and other leftwing schools of socio-economic thought.
Economic progressivism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_progressivism)
That's my last reply about the semantics game being played .

yeah we could do with less progressivism .

So Tom the answer is a return to tarriff walls, inheritance taxes, inefficient local taxes

We have all those on top of the progressive income tax and many other hidden fees ,licensings, tolls etc.. Over in Europe they also tack on national VATs . Gimme a break ! It's not that the governments don't collect enough revenues... They spend too much.

We have all those on top of the progressive income tax and many other hidden fees ,licensings, tolls etc.. Over in Europe they also tack on national VATs . Gimme a break ! It's not that the governments don't collect enough revenues... They spend too much.

I think you should examine the Greek situation, it is exactly that that government doesn't collect enough revenues. I would agree they also spend too much but if they had an effective taxation system they wouldn't have the problem they do.

Not living with a VAT you fail to understand what an effective mechanism it really is. If your country had that effective mechanism then perhaps there would not be an argument for raising income tax. In my fair land income tax rates have fallen dramatically since the introduction of the GST. Now a Carbon Tax, that is a horse of a different colour.

Oh I know that, here's some info:
Progressive Democrats of America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Democrats_of_America)

Nowhere does it say "wealth redistribution". You made that up of course.

Its part and parcel to the Democrat party platform... Obama and many prominent Lefties call for it, and have publicly, many times.

YOU yourself call for it here by saying the so called "Rich" should pay everything. And the so-called "poor" should pay nothing.

Not living with a VAT you fail to understand what an effective mechanism it really is. If your country had that effective mechanism then perhaps there would not be an argument for raising income tax. In my fair land income tax rates have fallen dramatically since the introduction of the GST. Now a Carbon Tax, that is a horse of a different colour

I'd glady take it instead of an income tax.

YOU yourself call for it here by saying the so called "Rich" should pay everything. And the so-called "poor" should pay nothing.
Ok, quote me where I said that.

Ok, go ahead and quote me where I said that.

Why should I waste my time. I know you have, you know you have... every Democrat thinks its fair for half the population to pay no taxes and still argue the "Rich" aren't paying enough.

THAT is exactly what redistribution of wealth is.

It wasn't cute or Clever when Bill Clinton tried to parse words... and nothing has changed since.

Why should I waste my time. I know you have, you know you have....every Democrat thinks its fair for half the population to pay no taxes and still argue the "Rich" aren't paying enough.
a) I never said it so you owe me an apology
b) I'm not even a democrat
c) you don't speak for all people who define themselves as democrats - people are individuals and beliefs run along a continuum. There are extremes on both sides.

I can't imagine living in a country where 50% of the population hates the other 50% - sounds like hell on earth.

How about a fair balance between conservative and progressive ideas? How about a fair balance between socialism, and capitalism? Why does it have to be either, or?

Why does the marriage have to be between two that hate each other? What happened to fair balance that resolves issues to the benefit of the entire collective?

Why does finances, money, and taxes have to be a weapon, a wall, or a fence that separates people? Why can't it be a tool we use to make things work better?

Why would a bank need more money, when all they have to do is invest wisely for growth. That's the trouble with the big banks, they don't invest and make a profit, they gamble on the big prize. Banks are so short term they have forgotten the long term steady financial streams that made them banks in the first place, and have become high stakes casinos. They don't partner to build, or create anything, just suck all the cash one way, there way, to spread among themselves, and the fools that depend on them.

Until the IMF has a global economy to support, I say give them NOTHING! That's goes for Wall Street too!! To have a true global economy, you have to circulate, NOT SUCK the tools of the entire collective, not just a few.

I don't care what short sited, selfish, conservative, right wing, one way, narrow minded, hate spewing, finger pointing bashers say.

We talk, work, and resolve, or we fight.

Those are the choices, the biggest and strongest conquering the small and weakest, and telling them what to do, and how to do it, just like in the old days. Masters, and slaves. And if its any consolation smoothy, history tells you that in every empire, it crumbles and is looted by a bigger empire. So that dollar you work so hard to hold onto, and didn't circulate, for sure those that ain't got it are coming to get it. So you better make friends with the ones you hate and talk about so bad, like dogs, or they will take what you got.

At least learn to talk to them, not about them. Have your forgotten that for all your hard work, someone had to take a chance, and invest in you? Sure you have because you think you did it all on your own.

So go ahead, make more poor people, you don't like them having a few creature comforts, to have SOMETHING, well they will surely take yours, or what you think is YOURS.

So who's side are you on? The few, or the many? Oh that's right, its your side, or NO side.

Nice rant Tal I particularly like your question "why would a bank need money"we should apply that theorum the next time one of your banks fails.

a) I never said it so you owe me an apology
b) I'm not even a democrat
c) you don't speak for all people who define themselves as democrats - people are individuals and beliefs run along a continuum. There are extremes on both sides.

I can't imagine living in a country where 50% of the population hates the other 50% - sounds like hell on earth.

I owe nobody an apology... you stand firmly behind many liberal programs.

Obama care is redistribution of wealth, because it forces the working half of society to not only pay for their own insurance... but for the other half as well.

Most so-called "Social Programs" all all thinly veiled redistribution of wealth programs...

Including every tax break that allows nearly half the population to avoid actually paying federal taxes at all. While raping those who work the hardest.

Oh, redistribution of wealth has many, many tentacles. And no matter the justification, not matter what you pretend to call it... its still redistribution of wealth.

Otherwise the left would be all for a flat tax. Noting can be more fair than everyone, and I mean everyone paying an equal percentage of their income.

Any deviation to make the rich pay more so the poor can pay less is redistribution in its purest sense.

Most rich people earned it... not inherited it.

Funny how the Kennedy's are never faulting for shielding all their money behind trusts... or how the left Ignores their current poster child, Warren Buffet that intends to shield most of his behind a trust. His claims he wants to pay more are bold faced lies... nothing less. He isn't even paying the taxes he is liable to pay... he's many millions in arrears to the IRS. You don't hear that from the left. If Sarah Palin was $10 overdue with taxes that's all you would hear, but Obama's staff and his flunkies are flush with tax cheats and scofflaws they excuse daily.

The problem is 50% of the population think they are entitled to a free ride, and have the gall to whine they aren't getting enough. And then Complain those that actually pay taxes aren't paying enough... the fact is we've been sick and tired of it for a long time... but now we are REALLY damn sick and tired of it. They pay no taxes they are entitled to no benefits. Personally, if they are hungry go to a soup kitchen. Or maybe give up the cell phone and cable TV or the play station to pay for food. I'm really tired of hearing I'M not doing enough when I'm being bled dry by people who are too good to work a second job or make a sacrifice, or heaven forbid, live within their means.

And as I've said... I don't even earn the average median income for the area I live and work. I squeek by and still have a third of my paycheck go in taxes... My newest car is 28 years old because I can't afford the taxes on a new on much less the payment or insurance... and I have to hear from the Bloviater-in-chief at the White house... I'm not doing enough for his chosen flock. Well screw them... let them pay their OWN bills for once.

Lets see. Buffet is pushing to pay more taxes but that would mean actually paying the taxes owed. Hey what's a extra billion between friends.

Report: Buffett's Berkshire Owes $1 Billion In Back Taxes (http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/buffett-irs-back-taxes/2011/09/01/id/409520)

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/warren-buffett-taxes-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html)

Cal yup... also that clown who used to run Google before he was canned ;the unemployed Eric Schmidt(campaign advisor and major donor to Barack Obama,) ,called for higher income taxes on himself now that he doesn't have income [According to Forbes he is the 136th richest person in the world, with an estimated wealth of $7 billion.]
He was given a nice little golden parachute of $100 million to leave Google. He should pony up and give what he thinks he owes to the IRS. Earlier this years there were rumors he was headed to the Obama Adm as Secretary of Commerce.
Why wait for the rates to be raised ? Do it now!! Send to:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

... also that clown who used to run Google before he was canned ;the unemployed Eric Schmidt
This guy? Eric Schmidt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt?) I would love to be as accomplished as him. Doesn't seem like a clown to me.

Yeah that clown.