Commentary

Humanitarian Government: Part 4, Part 3 of Economic Primer

The Midnight Goddess Nyx

• 21 min read
Humanitarian Government: Part 4, Part 3 of Economic Primer

Section 4



Good day, and this is part three of getting everyone who reads this on the same page as to terminology and/or explanations.


Yes, it’s going to be very much like a history lesson, but…money, finances, and even governmental systems have been around almost as long as humans have been around. So,  I’m going to jump in. Part 1 will dip your toe in slowly, so if you don’t want to be pushed into the deep end, I suggest starting with Part 1.

Issue (repeated from Part 1 & 2)


Before I get into anything, I’m going to take the time to define some terms. They’re in use today, but may be defined by me in different ways or contexts. Some will be common words, like ‘money’, while others will be socio-economic and governmental systems and descriptions, and there might even be new terms I come up with.

I say socio-econ-governmental systems for a specific reason: when people interchangeably use terms like ‘Socialism’, ‘Marxism’, ‘Communism’, and such, I need to spend the time needed not only to clarify but to teach. Those terms I mentioned? They share similar features but can be quite different. Those who lump them together are like mixing ‘oranges’, ‘tangerines’, ‘tangelos’, ‘grapefruit’, and saying they are all the same thing. If anyone has firsthand experience with that variety, they can attest to their differences. They may all be citrus, but they are also very different. Additionally, another essential facet is often overlooked: everything, every little thing, is interconnected.

Definitions


Taxes/Taxation (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11):You know that money you have to pay to the Federal Government by April 15thevery year? Yeah, you know that: your taxes. But you also know 'pay roll' taxes, too (if you're working): those monies are used to fund social security and Medicare (services you'll want available later in life if you're not already there). But, you also probably think of sales tax, too: state or local, sometimes both. Normally, these types of taxes are to pay for 'running the government' and 'supporting needed social systems'. Um, sorry even to the military members (former and current), the bloated military budget isn't really giving much to you or any supporting structures for you or your family so I'm not wanting the military budget to grow any further for a while. There are other, very hush-hush or public but not well known and expensive projects, that fit that category, too. Now if you're talking infrastructure maintenance or upgrading, programs that can help keep people working or just surviving day-to-day (social investments), and taking the variations out of education budgets and more; then we'll talk. Talk as in real-world costs, real-world consequences, and who pays for what in reality, etc.

Those are also called direct taxes and you know those well and they are public knowledge. But have you heard of Excise taxes? No?

I'll ask another question: have you ever drank alcohol? Smoked (either kind and if you don't know what I'm talking about, one I'm glad you don't know anything about, the other, you're missing out), or even ingesting ANYTHING that is legal, sold in legalized stores and might make pain, certain other medical issues bearable, or even just make you have the blurry feeling of 'good' like alcohol? Yes? Well, you've paid excise taxes. Those are for specific goods.

In most places, if you directly own/pay for a home, more than likely you also know property taxes. If you rent, that's figured into your rent, too. In most areas, that's where monies to run schools come from. Those charter schools (for profit companies who 'teach' and 'run' schools) or (shudder) some religious schools (I'm looking at one particular State for that little stunt) are gaining those public dollars. I'll go into a section all it's own about education later, and my opinions on that situation. Either way, YOU still pay to educate the next generation (not that it's a bad thing, just a serious responsibility).

Now, there are also two more kinds of taxes: capital gains and estate. Most of you who'll read this won't be paying these: ever. Why? Well Capital Gains are from the sale of assets or investments. I won't say houses may not fall into that category, so I may have lied a bit about that. But I'm not lying about stocks, bonds, and other sort of assets. I'm not teaching a full course on economics, I don't have at least a year, I'm not that interesting of an author to do so, and I'm not wanting to follow my High School economics teachers footsteps (that class was mandatory and the man teaching it...I generally had no issues staying awake during classes but that one? Yeah, an all out battle to learn the material via lectures).

Now the federal government, especially a few parts recently, will have you think 'the 'rich'' were being taxed out of existence because in some cases. Those cases being people who can invest, make money off those investments, and are horribly hurt by those taxes. I'll call bullshit on that thinking.

Now capital gains is broken down to two additional parts: long and short term. Now, you don't have to tell me what you think about this, and I'm not digging into the volumes of tax code to find loopholes. If you think there aren't any, well, I've a fresh water ocean in the Sahara to sell you.

If you make over $48,350 to $200,000 per year (the rates are based on taxable income and filing status) and single, or $96,701 to $250,000 if married and filing jointly; you're supposedly supposed to pay 15% capital gains (remember, this is from selling assets). At $200,001 or $250,001 ranges, then that tax goes up to 20%. Now, when billionaires who obviously own loads of assets and sell them (and generally that hits the news), do you honestly think they're paying either? Two letters: N. O.

Short-term is broken down to six ranges and covers assets held for one year or less. Those are taxed like normal income. I'll give you a run down: amounts earned as a single person, amounts earned as a married couple filing jointly, then the percentage of supposed pay in. I've already given you an idea of how that works, so won't go into that more:

0-11,925 0-23,850 10%

11,236-48,475 23,851-96,950 12%

48,476-197,300 96,951-394,600 22%

197,301-250-350 394,601-501,050 24%

250,526-626,350 501,051-751,600 35%

Over 626,350 over 751,600 37%

Looks fair? Well, not only I've issues with the entire tax code, and supposedly the rates are supposed to help 'the working poor'. Problem is, as long as you're not working in certain specific jobs, even if you make the federal minimum wage, you're paying the 12% income tax. In most areas of the country, just to note, the federal minimum wage isn't even close to a living wage for a single person, forget a married couple. So we're talking 12% nearly across the board for 'lower middle class' or 'working poor'. Also, mind you, those two terms and the two lowest amounts of income? Yeah, you might gain (if you're lucky enough to invest and such but at under a living wage, you're not going to be investing in anything) but are you paying more? Yes.

The reason I say this for either income tax or capital gains, short or long term, is that there are more of 'us' than those making over 250k a year. Does it equal out? Well, I already told you the tax code is written in such ways there are loopholes and if you know how to exploit them, the above tax rates mean nothing. Personally, even as a married couple and no matter what part of my life, I've yet to see my family make over 50k a year. That 37% touted as being exorbitant and crippling for the 'rich' is based on fictitious real numbers. If anyone had dug into the last ten years of income taxes based on the highest percentages (and these change all the time) and IRS real data, you won't find that percentage actually paid in. THIS is why our tax code needs to change. Real-world data versus 'best case' numbers are wildly out of touch with each other.

I would also say much the same for Estate Taxes. Those are from wealth transferred upon death. Now, that's broken down to ten rungs. I'll do a rundown like I did for short-term capital gains and income taxes, but this will be the values of estates and tax rates. Also, let me explain what is taxed: cash, real estate, stocks, and other assets. Also, let me clue you in: Boomers were the wealthiest group of people based on property ownership, saved funds, and potential investments. I could go on and on about why that worked out, but I don't have about a hundred pages and hours to go on that information line. What I can tell you is this: I'm Gen X, I've already lost both parents, and even with just a house and a bank account that was well under $50k, I paid estate taxes. Here's' the breakdown:

Up to $10,000 18% (so if your parent's owned a home, you paid taxes)

10,001-40,000 20%

40,000-80,000 22%

80,001-160,000 24%

$160,001-750,000 26%

750,001-1,500,000 28%

1,500,001-2,500,000 30%

2,500,001-5,000,000 32%

5,00,001-10,000,000 34%

over 10,000,000 40%

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm sure you don't have tax havens or ways to have legal maneuverings to shield yours (or anyone who you might inherit from) assets from estate taxes. I do know of certain legal versions of trusts and maneuverings that do, however. So, again...a worthless percentage chart and no real comparisons to IRS data versus real-world pay in data. If you're a tax person, accountant, or economists, feel free to do that sort of research and get that to me, please. That kind of analysis and research capabilities aren't my bailiwick and my economic specialty is family and short term.

Depression (12, 13, 14)/Recession (15,16): Now these two terms are tied into each other. They are also both issues all capitalistic systems suffer from.

Recessions are generally a national problem (and in the US, it goes via a 'wave affect' with the Mid-west being hit toward the end or past recovery lines on the coasts, generally). These are also more than a few months.

Depressions? Well, yeah, same sort of thing as a recession, but can be years long and involve the entire globe. See my next entry on The Great Depression for more info. Just saying: The Great Depression's history isn't good, isn't what you might think it was, and wasn't localized to the US.

Both are marked by decreased economic activity: the GDP (Gross Domestic Product), real income, employment levels, industrial levels and wholesale and retail sales. Look around you today, you tell me what we're living in: 'normal' economic health, a boom, or (at the very least) a recession?

Both also have similar triggers: financial crises, external trade shocks, natural disasters, or even adverse demand shocks. Again: tell me what you see.

The Great Depression (18, 19, 20, 21): The Great Depression should be a known event for everyone. But I'm not counting on US history being taught in schools, or at the very least not allowing uncomfortable truths be told.

Back before 1929, people ended up in the Stock Market with extended credit. Much more than is allowed today. In fact, some of the guardrails that have been loosened, so..as said, history is either blatantly being ignored, or it's not taught and that allows for history to repeat itself, like the adage says.

Now, before the crashes (and fairly close together), it wasn't just stocks being bought with no set return guaranteed (and still isn't) and a good amount of that being on credit that caused things to go sideways. That is what is called 'speculation'.

Banks, too, played a heavy part in this, due to a lack of regulations. Today, like stated, some of the guardrails put in place during or right after the Great Depression have been loosened or outright taken out of play. The banks were able to have loose lending practices, so that's where the credit came into play on buying stocks.

Between the two, wealth inequality grew.

In the summer of 1929, a recession was underway in the US. By October, things rapidly changed. In the beginning of that month, prices declined on the New York Stock Exchange. That eroded confidence in our banking system. By the end of October, the Great Depression was either born, or already entrenched. The fateful days you might want to remember or learn more about are October 24, 1929 (Black Thursday) and October 29, 1929 (Black Tuesday). Those were days of massive sell offs or exchanges happened. This is also where the breaks on trading come from to stop massive sell offs or prices crashing in today's stock exchanges.

As stated, a recession was already underway. That was spurred by problems in the agricultural system (debt, over production and falling prices) and also overproduction or inability to sell output due to low wages and purchasing power (see what I mean by history repeating itself?). That fed into lost jobs, cutting production and of course the situation fed into itself and spiraled down. Even then, though, investors kept buying shares in losing areas of the economy, not watching unemployment increasing and stock prices for purchase rose and exceeded real value. Guess what? Again...see the parallels?

Those who realized what was going on sold, and that started in September. That sparked off sharp share values to stall, then fall. At that time, an attempt to forestall more issues (also look to Panic of 1907), lending banks joined forces and tried to keep things 'on the level' by purchasing stocks above market value. In 1907, that helped. In 1929, that strategy failed. Well, it slowed things down, because, as noted, there were two 'Black' days: the 24thand 29th. Between those days, there was a brief recovery, but the damage was done.

That recession that was mentioned became the Great Depression because it didn't just affect the US. Depressions are felt world-wide in comparison to recessions being felt on a national or local area. Some schools of economic thought think of the economy as cycles. From what I've seen and read, all capitalist economies suffer from that sort of cycling.

Banks were overrun, didn't have enough money on hand and shuttered. People lost everything and, if you read deep enough into the sociology and psychiatric portion of the Great Depression, a spike on suicides because of becoming 'poor' or 'bankrupt' overnight happened (or even within hours).

Now, remember, the US monetary system was backed up by gold. Those prices were affected world-wide, too. But also note, that problems are never so cut and dry or even that fast. Yes, the noticeable affects did happen fast, but the problems weren't just from September, either. There were issues throughout that year. Another factor that may have played a huge part was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. In that assumption of part of the issues, there are two conservative economists that argue that tariff proposal was the immediate cause of the crash because investors feared it. Yet another parallel in today's world. But why would tariffs help or start the Great Depression? Two conservative economists, Jude Wannisky and Alan Reynolds support the next as being the root cause.

Calcium carbide was being imported from Canada at that time. The U.S. Senate was in negotiations with itself about the Act and sixteen senators changed their votes unexpectedly. Those sixteen had been considered anti-tariff until that vote on October 23rd, 1929. That afternoon, and the passing of that Act, started the sell offs. At that time, to, Otto H. Kahn was a Wall Street banker and supported tariffs and was appointed as the treasurer of the Republican Senatorial Campaigning Committee. Anti-tariff Republicans, AKA Progressive Republicans, (just as the 'anti' says) were again the Act and finally forced Kahn to publicly turn down that appointment on October 29th, the day of the last crash.

There are other theories and dates that either fed into, or are placed as the starting places of the Great Depression. Needless to say, I won't go into the weeds on this further.

Here's the really bad news, and it needs to be heeded: this wasn't just a year or two issue that went away on its own. Far from it.

The Great Depression lasted to about 1939, and was a time of high unemployment (some sources say 20% or more), high poverty (you might have seen black and white photos of soup kitchen lines), reductions in industrial production and international trade, economic failures, lost ownership of farms, and bank failures. Before the Depression, there were about 25,000 banks. The US lost 9,000 of those banks, a reduction of about a third. Think of what that would mean in today's economy.

That Tariff act? Oh, yeah...let's see what all it did after it passed the Senate. Current President Herbert Hoover didn't want to intervene much in the economy, and signed the Tariff Act in 1930. To say the least, that worsened the issues. It also played a part in getting him defeated in 1932.

Yet another piece of the fall-out: Germany depended heavily on U.S. Loans and the crises caused the fertile ground of high unemployment there to fuel political extremism and you might be able to follow that path: WWII due to Adolf Hitler's rise with the Nazi Party in 1933. Remember, the Great Depression didn't end until about 1939 (of course, different economists say different years, I'm keeping to the latest, nothing moves by itself and I'm not talking just the US in this instance. Remember: depressions are world-wide recessions.)

World-wide, production, consumer demand, the inability to have monetary expansion (which I will say is now a problem) due to tying most of the worlds economies of a fixed currency exchange rate, went down. Unemployment, social issues, and of course all those side effects grew.

I'll leave it up to you to draw conclusions from Franklin D. Roosevelt's involvement later via the New Deal, and the advent in regulations and legal methods of prevention did to either help or hinder any types of outcomes.



Stagflation (22, 23, 24): This is a economic condition characterized by three problems: high inflation, stagnant economic growth and high unemployment. I call that a very close cousin to recessions or depressions.

Now, I also have problems with economic data in general, especially when it's to unemployment. Remember, unemployment is only for so long and whatever numbers they put out is only based on those currently on the rolls. The amount of homeless, to me, is a much better indicator of employment numbers. Right now, there is a push for getting homeless out of cities and such. There's problems with that. Like where to put those people and there are other solutions.

Wages (25, 26, 28)/Salary (26, 28): I break this up for two reasons: if I use wages, it's an hourly amount paid to a worker. Salary is that flat amount for work. It's also exploited. When you demand your workers to accept working conditions and demands simply to keep a job and pay a flat rate, especially for extra working hours despite contracts, you're being exploited. I won't go further into things here. Look forward to another article about that.


Inflation (29, 30, 31 ):This too, ties into recessions and depressions. It's simply, for the US, your dollar no longer buys the same amount. This has been going on and also a problem with consumer/capitalist systems.

You'll find 'shrinkflation' as being a term used. That is when smaller amounts are being priced at the same amount. Essentially the same: your dollar isn't going to buy as much.

Profit (33, 34):This is simply whatever 'extra' money from the gross amount earned by a business with all the costs of running that business.

So, when you see quarterly statement releases, you're seeing that amount of profit. 'Nuff said.

Stocks (35, 36, 37): This is a representation of at least partial ownership that has been divided. There's a whole dictionary of terms that deal with stocks alone. Voting decisions of taking a company in a particular direction is generally based on the amount of ownership one has. In this age, it's becoming less and less for individuals who are able to vote or trade unless you're part of an rung of individual wealth or another company.

Bonds (38, 39, 40): These are a type of debt. Generally you'll see various levels of government issuing them as to raise capital for whatever it's for. These are bought for a certain amount and anyone who buys these also earns interest and the principal of what you buy until maturity.

These are considered fixed-income investments, less risk, and also as an example: T-bills are considered part of that category.

Discretionary Income (41, 42): In short: any individual income that is not allocated for anything necessary to live as food and shelter. I'd throw in everything that you need personally for a job (like cell phones), and utilities.

Trade Deficit (43, 44, 45): This, I understand and it's separate from governmental debt.

When a nation imports more than they export, you'll have a negative trade balance. However, this isn't all bad. In the US, it's also being used as essentially a weapon and used interchangeably with national debt. Apples and oranges.

There are pros and cons to having a trade deficit. The pro is that it's a sign of a good economy because people have money to spend. The con is you are relying more on outside the nation goods and/or services.

What those in power seem to not understand and want to be stuck several decades back is that there are supplies (like certain raw materials) are only from outside the US. Not only that, but no one nation is able to stand by itself anymore. Our social, economic, and even governmental items all affect each nation on Earth, and that's not just the US. Just the US positioned itself as being a figurehead and, due to issues from our forms of government and ideology, we're no longer the leader.

Governmental Debt (46, 47. 48, 49):This term has two AKAs--public debt or sovereign debt. This is the major term to look at that seems to be interchangeable to fit narratives fairly easily by politicians with ‘deficit’ (meaning the trade deficit). This is money to fund the government and includes loans taken out from other means (like nations) or selling bonds (Treasury Bills, Notes, or Bonds).

It gets complex as hell very quickly so I’ll try to do this justice.

First, it gets broken into four distinct characteristics: Domestic Debt, Foreign Debt, Gross debt and Net Debt. Yeah. Now hold onto your hats.

Domestic debt is held by the residents of a country’s population. So, currently, not enough Americans can buy into even low-level ‘T-Bills’, ‘T-Notes’, or ‘T-Bonds. When I graduated High School a long time ago, I had some Savings Bonds, yes, from the government, and I had to let them mature to get the most back from them. Otherwise, I got fined and didn’t get the full amount…ask me how I know.

I can also tell you why not enough Americans can buy into any sort of investment. When one is either just barely treading financial water or is drowning, you can’t even afford air to breathe (OK, OK…food…both are needed to survive, along with water). So money makes money, right? According to our system of finance and economy, yes. Remember, credit is supposed to generate more money. But for whom? Those who can effectively generate that credit (banks) and those who can afford to acquire or increase their credit to spend on hard assets like land or natural resources that generate money when sold. Again, most Americans can’t do that. Yet, what do our illustrious leaders do? They increase taxes on the wrong people. 

I’m going to go on a bit of a rant right here. When pay doesn’t increase even to cover inflation fully, when people have to work multiple jobs and still have to pay out of their checks not only taxes but even health insurance and other required taxes or governmental fees, prices go up on every damn thing needed to survive…you’re not going to have money to spend, that slows the economy, which in turn has impacts on the job market, which then circles back. A vicious cycle of life that eventually will break. Those with accountants, make enough for loopholes, can get out of audits, make more money in less than an hour than a working American can make in their lifetime, and still bitch about not making enough money…give me a break. The government's yelling and screaming about governmental debt and its efforts to reduce it shouldn’t be seen by people who, day by day, struggle to pay basic bills for survival. They need to look at those who aren’t squeezed from all sides. So, certain billionaires can afford huge charities and/or space programs? Well, they could still afford those luxuries and still pay fair taxes. Big corporations, especially worldwide ones, that make billions in profits, gain subsidies for their products, and still shaft workers with not enough workers to do the work instead of hiring more and keeping pay and benefits as low as possible? Again, these corporations have the ways and means to diversify in various ways that ‘normal’ people don’t or can’t do, and can afford taxes. Both individuals and corporations tend to pay less in taxes than working Americans because of loopholes and tax code specifically written (not loopholes) to give them ways of getting that bill reduced. Not to mention they also bitch and complain about ‘bloated’ safety net programs that, in all reality, are of their own making. If you just paid living wages that cover household costs and allow discretionary spending, you’d find your profit margins possibly the same or even increased, depending on things. That way, the government isn’t silently funding your lacks and subsidizing your profits. I could end this with a colorful word, but I’ve already used up my allowable colorful words for this section—end of rant.

Back to my topic..

Foreign Debt is held by non-residents and is increasingly used. This is what the complaining is really about when politicians complain about debt and paying it down. Again, how to pay for that want? You’ll have to come up with money to not only cover interest and the base (minimum) payment, like any other loan in any household in America. That gets me back to my rant, and who should be paying more taxes instead of getting breaks and ‘trickle down’ rewards (which don’t happen).

Gross Debt, like gross income, but opposite, includes all liabilities. That means all national budget overruns that are allowed or extended, debt interest payments, and any other liabilities not listed.

Net Debt, similar to net income, but in reverse, is the gross debt minus financial assets held by the government. Now, I can only assume this is natural resource leases, rented land, or other forms of income that may be called an asset that aren’t taxes (or are…like all government mumble-jumble, it's all double-speak, legalese, and for the ordinary person--which I am--confusing and unintelligible. Not to mention, they throw in magic spells and fables. In plain terms: creative accounting).

Trickle-down economics (50, 51, 52: This term was used and started in the early 1980s by President Ronald Reagan. Not that it didn't exist earlier and also you'll hear 'Reaganomics'.

I, and I'll remind you, trace the large amount of problems we have today to that point in time.

Trickle-down is an economic system or school of thought that if you allow businesses or owners of businesses more profit via tax breaks and other methods, that they would use that extra money and 'trickle-down' that extra money to workers.

Uh, did that happen? Again two letters: N. O. That money went into profits or other disbursements that made those who are 'rich' (meaning having significant amounts of money who can invest or own) even richer. It also ties into stagflation and pay that isn't raising to keep up with inflation or the additional costs of what is needed just to function to even get a job.

To close, sorry this was long. I didn't want even a 4th installment on economic definitions. Next up: comparative government.


_____________

FOOTNOTES (NOTE: THIS WILL CHANGE)

  1. https://www.britannica.com/money/taxation
  2. https://www.britannica.com/money/taxation
  3. https://taxfoundation.org/taxedu/glossary/tax/
  4. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=taxes%2C+taxation%2C+reason+and+definition&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  5. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economics+excise+taxes&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  6. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/excisetax.asp
  7. https://taxfoundation.org/taxedu/glossary/excise-tax/
  8. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=is+capital+gains+the+same+as+income+tax+for+working+peoople
  9. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052015/what-difference-between-income-tax-and-capital-gains-tax.asp
  10. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=is+capital+gains+the+same+as+income+tax+for+working+peoople&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  11. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/estate-tax
  12. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=definition%2C+economic%2C+depression&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  13. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_depression
  14. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/economic-depression/
  15. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economics%2C+recession&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession
  17. https://www.britannica.com/money/recession
  18. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=The+Great+depression&atb=v496-1&ia=web&iax=about
  19. https://www.britannica.com/event/Great-Depression
  20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression
  21. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_crash_of_1929
  22. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=definition+of+%27stagflation%27&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  23. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stagflation.asp
  24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation
  25. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=definition+of+wages%2C+economics&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  26. https://www.britannica.com/money/wage
  27. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=definition+of+salary%2C+economics&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  28. https://www.britannica.com/money/wage
  29. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=definition+of+inflation%2C+economic&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  30. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economic+definition+of+government+debt&atb=v4961&ia=web
  31. https://www.britannica.com/money/inflation-economics
  32. https://www.clevelandfed.org/center-for-inflation-research/inflation-101/what-is-inflation-start
  33. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economic%2C+profit&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  34. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/033015/what-difference-between-economic-profit-and-accounting-profit.asp
  35. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economic+definition+of+stocks&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  36. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stock.asp
  37. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock
  38. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stock.asp
  39. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/investing/what-is-a-bond/
  40. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economic+definition+of+bonds&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  41. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=economic%2C+discretionary+income&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  42. https://accountinginsights.org/what-is-discretionary-income-how-to-calculate-it/
  43. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=trade+deficit+definition&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  44. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/trade_deficit.asp
  45. https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2025/0904
  46. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_debt
  47. https://www.britannica.com/money/public-debt
  48. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/
  49. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/10/government-debt-economy-bonds-loans/
  50. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=trickle-down+economics+definition&atb=v496-1&ia=web
  51. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
  52. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/trickledowntheory.asp