Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
... exactly how does one account for the TRILLIONS of dollars, invested by others, into locating factories into our country, account for in the age of AI? Think very carefully before you respond.
By "others" you mean foreigners, right? That's simple. You can derive the following from the national income identity,
Investment = Trade Deficit + National Saving
Since our government spends out the kazoo, and since a majority of Americans don't know how to save, National Savings aren't enough to fund American investment. But the foreigners have lots of dollars because we run trade deficits with them. And some of those dollars get invested in new factories, machinery, and, yes AI, in the good old USA. That's "investment" in the equation above.
It's a great deal. The Chinese send us clothes, big screen TV's, etc. And we send them paper! Dollars! They invest those dollars in U.S. assets. Some goes into property, plant and equipment. And as to the dollars they recycle into U.S. government securities, if Trump gets his way and lowers and keeps interest rates at 1%, there will be enough inflation with time to make those dollars practically worthless! Poor Chinese chumps. Bahahaha!
You only had one, single, solitary job item on the plate - account for AI. Not AI data center construction or the power to run them. Think about the impact AI will have on the many, many jobs out there, particularly, the entry level jobs, at first, and so much higher up the food chain as we go.
Frankly, I'm rather ecstatic the BBB did not raise taxes, i.e. revenue for a never ending government bureaucracy and pocket linings for politicians.
To understand deportations, reconcile paper towels. They exist to clean up the mess of others. There is no need for court processing. They are here illegally, so - Go on! Git! In Texas, Texas, Yee Haw, we have something called home rule. If'n you are in my joint illegally your choice is to Go On, Git or not. There will be no court hearing or process in your lifetime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy
AI datacenters don’t manufacture anything physical. They create data from data.
The components of these datacenters are rows of rack mounted servers whose parts are primarily manufactured overseas.
However the electrical infrastructure required to supply them might be manufactured here locally. And the fuel to power them might be produced here.
But that really has very little to do with the OBBBA. Spending was not cut nearly enough, Income tax revenues were not raised at all, and a lot of those savings are now being invested into a huge expansion of the immigration system that is almost entirely funding the capture and deportation process but almost none of the court process.
By "others" you mean foreigners, right? That's simple. You can derive the following from the national income identity,
Investment = Trade Deficit + National Saving...
Not exclusively. If you invest your time, talent and $$ to create something, I don't necessarily assume you are a foreigner, any more than I assume you have a white hooded robe, still neatly hanging up in your closet.
Regardless, we are one of the few countries on the planet where one can greatly create wealth, with a bit of hard work and determination or insider trading insights, in the case of Nancy Pelosi and other politicians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny
The Chinese send us clothes, big screen TV's, etc. And we send them paper! Dollars!...
Or did we export environmental pollution and slave labor to them in exchange for cheap plastic trinkets?!?
You only had one, single, solitary job item on the plate - account for AI. Not AI data center construction or the power to run them. Think about the impact AI will have on the many, many jobs out there, particularly, the entry level jobs, at first, and so much higher up the food chain as we go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do
... exactly how does one account for the TRILLIONS of dollars, invested by others, into locating factories into our country, account for in the age of AI? Think very carefully before you respond.
How do you know that Trillions of dollars are being invested by foreigners in manufacturing and factories in the United States?
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis new foreign direct investment in equaled 151.0 billion in 2024.
Tariff revenues have been growing for months, and the latest data shows that the U.S. has collected $133.7 billion from them as of Aug. 21 2025.
Long way to go.
Meanwhile
For the current fiscal year 2025, the Bipartisan Policy Center reports a cumulative deficit of $1.6 trillion as of the end of July.
The new tariffs except for part of the iron and steel levies didn't take effect until April or afterwards. That's 3-1/2 months. Annualize your 133.7 and assume most of that was collected since April and you shouldn't have any problem getting to 300 billion. And yes, we're running deficits as a % of GDP of about 6%. $300 billion is only about 1% of GDP, so the tariffs aren't going to come close to getting us to where we need to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1blackman1
From whom have these $300b supposedly been (or will be) raised. If it’s from consumers that’s a consumption tax which just raises the costs of goods. If it’s from the retailer and wholesalers who eat some of the tariff, then that's a tax on businesses. I thought you Republican types were anti-tax, particularly on businesses. Doesn't that essentially negate the 2017 and 2025 tax reductions on businesses that you, Lusty and TC brag added so much wealth across the board to the economy (though I'd say it made the rich richer and did little for the middle class - but that's a different discussion).
If we were just gonna tax business then we could have simply not lowered their taxes.
The CBO's latest projection is that about $4 trillion will be cut from deficits over the next 10 years by the tariffs, which is about the same as what the CBO estimated the Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) would add to deficits. HOWEVER, please note that if Democrats were in charge, they would have extended a lot of provisions in the BBB. Democrats certainly wouldn't have chosen to rescind the Trump tax cuts for anyone in the upper middle income class on down.
That said, for nth time, the tariffs suck. I agree with your post in Vitaman's thread, that you'd prefer a sales tax because it's transparent and the consumer knows how much he's paying the government. But the big reason is that tariffs reduce the benefits we receive from comparative advantage. There are some things that Mexicans and Chinese and Canadians do a lot better than we do, and there are some things that we're much better at than they are. We're all more prosperous when we do what we do best. You're better off lawyering and letting farmers, ranchers, slaughter houses, food processers, and supermarkets put the food on your table instead of doing it in all in your backyard and basement. The same with countries. We're not going to benefit, as Howard Lutnick says, from screwing screws in iphones.
Based on my insiders, who know their shit, the tariffs are regressive taxation at its worst. For example, the foreign supply chain and the U.S. retailers of upmarket clothing (sold by, say, Victoria's Secret or higher end department stores) have absorbed much of the cost of the tariffs. By lowering their margins, they've been able to avoid raising prices a lot. On the other hand, the foreign suppliers can't drop their prices on what they sell to Walmart, because the margins are so thin. That is, if they drop their prices to try to partially make up for tariffs they lose money. Walmart's margins suck too. They make their money on volume. So Walmart can't absorb the tariffs either. Who bears the cost increase? Like you said, the consumer. The Walmart shopper. The people who can least afford to pay higher prices.
You have not however caught me in a gotcha moment. Like I've said repeatedly, the problem is our inefficient federal government spends too much money. When you raise taxes and feed the beast in Washington D.C., you lower GDP growth and you hurt the workingman, the businesses, the investors, and the taxpayers. We need to cut federal expenditures across the board, 8% or whatever. That's the best solution. Let the states and the localities take up any slack. They're much more efficient than the bozos in D.C.
And if you want to raise the federal corporate tax rate back to 35%, where it was before 2018, you're way out of the Democratic Party mainstream. Only people like Sanders and Warren want to do that, because the sane Democrats realize it would be plain stupid. Like you say, that's for another thread, along with your mistaken belief that upper income earners are undertaxed. This thread is about ME and the eccie fiscal hawks.
Or did we export environmental pollution and slave labor to them in exchange for cheap plastic trinkets?!?
And what's wrong with that?
Seriously, what you're calling "slave labor" are great jobs in many countries. Billions have risen from abject poverty because of capitalism and trade.
...According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis new foreign direct investment in equaled 151.0 billion in 2024...
Thankfully, the year 2024 is behind us.
We are transitioning from the Gas lighting age to the Golden age.
Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy
...I have a feeling that the largest foreign investment in America is the large amount of treasury bonds that foreign banks and investors are purchasing.
People, businesses and countries put their $$ where they think it's safe and able to produce a good return.
...Human rights groups believe China has detained more than one million Uyghurs against their will over the past few years in a large network of what the state calls "re-education camps", and sentenced hundreds of thousands to prison terms.
A series of police files obtained by the BBC in 2022 has revealed details of China's use of these camps and described the routine use of armed officers and the existence of a shoot-to-kill policy for those trying to escape.
The US is among several countries to have previously accused China of committing genocide in Xinjiang. The leading human rights groups Amnesty and Human Rights Watch have published reports accusing China of crimes against humanity.
China denies all allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang. The Chinese government - speaking after details of the Xinjiang Police Files were published - said the peace and prosperity brought to Xinjiang as a result of its anti-terrorism measures were the best response to "all sorts of lies"...
Democrats seem like terrorists these days. Maybe China is on to something.
Let's get small. Real small. Like pocket<book> small.
Pretty danged good discussion going here, aside from the occasional (cough-cough) political sniping. Taking inspiration from the quote further below, trying to explain a Trillion seconds, allow me to explain US $1 Billion in simplistic terms. So, let's talk about real numbers for the common Man/Women/<No! There is no 3rd option>, i.e. taxpayer.
I have decided that there are about 200 Million taxpayers in the US, based partly on voting numbers in 2024 and a few other "fuzzy" factors, like booting out minor league tax payers, etc. Plus it makes the math easier to digest and relate to individual taxpayers.
Every time you hear of the "government" spending $1 Billion, divide that by 200 Million = $5/per taxpayer. It is a tax, aka non-tax deductible contribution to someone, somewhere, somehow. You have no real say to whence it goes. For a working couple household, times it by two. That should make it easier to digest/calculate what US $1Trillion means to each taxpayer (~$5,000).
Quote:
Originally Posted by orallvr69
...Does anyone know what a trillion is? Lets demo it by time:
one million seconds is about 11.5 days
one billion seconds is about 32 years
Here's the big one.
one trillion seconds is 31,689 years..
Pretty danged good discussion going here, aside from the occasional (cough-cough) political sniping. Taking inspiration from the quote further below, trying to explain a Trillion seconds, allow me to explain US $1 Billion in simplistic terms. So, let's talk about real numbers for the common Man/Women/<No! There is no 3rd option>, i.e. taxpayer.
I have decided that there are about 200 Million taxpayers in the US, based partly on voting numbers in 2024 and a few other "fuzzy" factors, like booting out minor league tax payers, etc. Plus it makes the math easier to digest and relate to individual taxpayers.
Every time you hear of the "government" spending $1 Billion, divide that by 200 Million = $5/per taxpayer. It is a tax, aka non-tax deductible contribution to someone, somewhere, somehow. You have no real say to whence it goes. For a working couple household, times it by two. That should make it easier to digest/calculate what US $1Trillion means to each taxpayer (~$5,000).Hope that helps.
For 'visualization'
On Aug 1 2025, the federal government spent $145.288 Billion
I have a feeling that the largest foreign investment in America is the large amount of treasury bonds that foreign banks and investors are purchasing.
foreign investment isn't an issue, it's not that large to the overall debt nor is the internal US debt by major companies and wealthy investors, the real problem here is the churn .. the 10 trillion "intergovernmental borrowing" and the interest on that massive decades long overspending.
that's the killer of the debt and why we are in such bad shape now
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny
And what's wrong with that?
Seriously, what you're calling "slave labor" are great jobs in many countries. Billions have risen from abject poverty because of capitalism and trade.
exactly! my bro of all things greed and good Tiny speaks! well most of it lol despite it's flaws nothing has created more wealth that the almighty capitalism! socialism/communism is pale bitch loser by a trillion miles to .. this
"and that malfunctioning corporation called the USA .."
From whom have these $300b supposedly been (or will be) raised. If it’s from consumers that’s a consumption tax which just raises the costs of goods. If it’s from the retailer and wholesalers who eat some of the tariff, then that's a tax on businesses. I thought you Republican types were anti-tax, particularly on businesses. Doesn't that essentially negate the 2017 and 2025 tax reductions on businesses that you, Lusty and TC brag added so much wealth across the board to the economy (though I'd say it made the rich richer and did little for the middle class - but that's a different discussion).
Lambasting the corporate tax cut of 2017 seems to be a favored go-to element of the compendium of rhetoric employed by the AOC/Bernie wing of the Democratic party for the purpose of blasting the "big, beautiful bill." Apparently, in their minds, fiscal sanity could be largely restored by making all those "rich people" pay their "fair share." But that's utter nonsense!
Substantially increasing the corporate tax rate is one of the worst ways to raise more revenue. For starters, the corporate tax rate (21%) is in line with the OECD average. Jacking it up would render American firms less competitive internationally and would incentivize the sort of inversions that were beginning to be a problem 10 or 12 years ago.
Besides, who do you think actually pays the corporate income tax? (Before some simpleton says something like, "Corporations, of course, you dumbass!," they might want to think through the issue of what is referred to as "tax incidence.")
Note also that the leaders of Scandinavia's social democracies understand the value of competitive corporate tax rates. Why don't American "progressives?"
(We covered all this in a thread on this topic last year. I think Tiny, Lustylad, and the Waco Kid, all of whom understand the topic very well, participated. Perhaps some of our progressive friends missed it!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do
... exactly how does one account for the TRILLIONS of dollars, invested by others, into locating factories into our country, account for in the age of AI? Think very carefully before you respond.
That question was posed in reply to my earlier post. Thanks for the admonishment to "think carefully" before I respond, but I might point out that I rarely say anything without thinking, so you need not worry!
But I must say that I was a bit nonplussed by your question, as it's a bit difficult to divine what you're asking, given the way you crafted the query.
Judging from earlier posts, I'm guessing that it's a rhetorical question intended to make the point that a new AI-related investment boom is likely to power the economy through headwinds generated by tariff imposition and other factors with which the economy is struggling.
And maybe it will! That's one of the biggest debates taking place in the investment world today.
One thing to note is that the current run rate of AI-related investment in data centers, chip technology, foundry production, etc. is rocking along at about 1.2%, more or less, of GDP! That's more than the increase in domestic consumer-related consumption over the last couple of quarters.
Wrapped together with all of this is the political question of whether the "BBB" will look like a winner or loser to America's working- and middle class during the run-up to the next election cycles. If an AI-led productivity boom comes to fruition as wonderfully as envisioned by optimists, the economy may turn up roses. If not, it won't. (I suppose that since this is a political discussion forum, the politics of this are just as important as the economics.)
Tyler Cowen, who I consider one of the more interesting thinkers today, made the following point about the BBB in connection with a discussion about Trump's economic policy agenda writ large.
That is, with provisions such as allowing expensing rather than amortization of certain forms of new capital investment, along with other measures contained in the BBB, Trump is doing the metaphorical equivalent of pushing all the chips to the center of the table and making an all-in bet on the US economy -- and especially on technological advancement -- including but not limited to AI-related developments and total-factor productivity growth arising therefrom.
Tyler Cowen, who I consider one of the more interesting thinkers today, made the following point about the BBB in connection with a discussion about Trump's economic policy agenda writ large.
That is, with provisions such as allowing expensing rather than amortization of certain forms of new capital investment, along with other measures contained in the BBB, Trump is doing the metaphorical equivalent of pushing all the chips to the center of the table and making an all-in bet on the US economy -- and especially on technological advancement -- including but not limited to AI-related developments and total-factor productivity growth arising therefrom.
If you have a link to the discussion online I think I and some others would be interested in reading it.
...That question was posed in reply to my earlier post. Thanks for the admonishment to "think carefully" before I respond, but I might point out that I rarely say anything without thinking, so you need not worry!...
It goes without saying that you are well known to thinking both carefully and with keen insight - IMHO. Though you might have a Tiny blind spot on the impacts/opportunities/risks to humanity, posed by AI technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian
...But I must say that I was a bit nonplussed by your question, as it's a bit difficult to divine what you're asking, given the way you crafted the query.
Judging from earlier posts, I'm guessing that it's a rhetorical question intended to make the point that a new AI-related investment boom is likely to power the economy through headwinds generated by tariff imposition and other factors with which the economy is struggling.
And maybe it will! That's one of the biggest debates taking place in the investment world today.
One thing to note is that the current run rate of AI-related investment in data centers, chip technology, foundry production, etc. is rocking along at about 1.2%, more or less, of GDP! That's more than the increase in domestic consumer-related consumption over the last couple of quarters...
As to my crafty crafting: No offence intended. That last part (above) regarding GDP @ 1.2% is just start-up costs, a big ass blip if you will. Your latter point (below) is spot on about the "expensing" and the All-In aspect, i.e. get the $$ on the table now. Sort of a time is of the essence thing. Politically, one might argue it is mid-term or 2028 election centric, it is not. Regardless, Trump is right to go all in. What is the alternative?
An example: The proposed city of Manhattan sized data center that Meta is planning will follow the same trend line as any other large scale data center: A lot of up front capital (expensed vs amortized now) and labor costs, all told many, many $$Billions.
Once it is up and running, employment drops to almost nothing in a "lights out" data center, though utilities, especially electric costs, will remain sky high. EX: Remains to be seen if States like California, NY and NJ, who have very high energy costs, can even be players here. But would that scale be on-line by 2026 or even 2028? Not likely.
As to the actual meaning of the "think carefully" admonishment: It's really more about what happens to the citizens, i.e. workers and society writ large, as well as, entire industries once AI is fully running strong, as opposed to the monetary costs exclusively. Then the big Kahuna: How will we fair on the razors edge of managing versus surviving an AI world at large scale?
My having been on the front of the leading edge of many emerging technologies over many years; AI is a whole other beastie. To call it a game changer, seems childishly simplistic. It is more in the Universe changing caliber - IMHO. This isn't a transistor or microchip or modern production line or pull-top beer cans or sliced bread sort of innovation.
What happens if goes sentient or worse - woke or both? We've all seen the sci-fi movies on this general topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian
...Wrapped together with all of this is the political question of whether the "BBB" will look like a winner or loser to America's working- and middle class during the run-up to the next election cycles. If an AI-led productivity boom comes to fruition as wonderfully as envisioned by optimists, the economy may turn up roses. If not, it won't. (I suppose that since this is a political discussion forum, the politics of this are just as important as the economics.)
Tyler Cowen, who I consider one of the more interesting thinkers today, made the following point about the BBB in connection with a discussion about Trump's economic policy agenda writ large.
That is, with provisions such as allowing expensing rather than amortization of certain forms of new capital investment, along with other measures contained in the BBB, Trump is doing the metaphorical equivalent of pushing all the chips to the center of the table and making an all-in bet on the US economy -- and especially on technological advancement -- including but not limited to AI-related developments and total-factor productivity growth arising therefrom.
So my apologies for what may seem like a thread derail to some thinner skinned types.
Yes, AI is gonna cost a whole lot of $$ now and on going. Yes, it will heavily impact, potentially disrupt, economies globally, but especially ours, now and forward, in ways we may be challenged to comprehend.
Unfortunately, at this juncture - No, we cannot stop it from happening. Best to lean into it and look for the opportunities it presents us and the keep a sharp eye peeled for the dangers/risks it poses.
Imma start a separate OP thread later about another important trend I am perceiving in this thread. Teaser, a new/old technology Imma call it FI.
