Why is the Stock Market Crashing After Obama's Relection? (trading, work, company)

[16trillionandcounting]

Originally Posted by LordSquidworth

No matter my tax rate, I'll always look to make more. If that's not true, you're just small minded.

Really so if income over a million was taxed at 90% for an example, you'd still spend time and effort attempting to make more money when your share of your work is 10%?

[KrazeeKrewe]

Originally Posted by 16trillionandcounting

Really so if income over a million was taxed at 90% for an example, you'd still spend time and effort attempting to make more money when your share of your work is 10%?

In 1944 & 1945 the top marginal tax rate was 94%. We had our most productive & expansive years after that. I am not saying to do that today, but it proves that the wealthy are not job creators & taxing them does not destroy jobs or the economy.

We need to go after the tax cheats like Mitt Romney. His campaign claimed he gave tones of money to charities. It is all a tax sheltering rouse. Romney "gave money to the Mormon church" in a "Charitable Remainder Trust". This shelters his money from any lawsuit or taxes. He still controls this money, invest it to make even more tax free. Then he barrows 8% a year from it 100% tax free. Eventually he will have borrowed all of the money back out tax free & close the trust. Romney has never given a dime to anyone. He takes money from people & tell them he is helping them. Romney's grandfather was a crook & defected to Mexico to evade US laws. Mitt Romney's father was a crook who created the Mortgage Backed Security (MBS) to screw people out of houses & government out of money by creating a mini housing bubble in HUD under Nixon in 1970. Wallstreet copied this model & that is what caused this housing bubble we just had.

Mitt Romney over paid himself & his friends bonuses from Bain & ran it into the ground 20 years ago. He got a $10 million bailout from us tax payers & never paid it back. To boot he hides his money & refuses to pay most taxes. He also claims earnings was "carried interest" It's been 20 years Mitt, pay taxes or give back the $10 million bailout or both. Mitt Romney's Bain Capital would go around finding businesses who had a lot of equity built up & good credit. He would then barrow money from his investors to buy controlling interest in the company. Then he would take the newly acquired companies equity & pensions to pay back his shareholders. Then he would use the newly acquired companies credit to barrow as much as possible & pay his company, himself & his investors fat dividends. Now this newly acquired company has no pension funds & huge debt load. Their workers will pay the price & many wind up on the government dole as the 47% takers Romney doesn't care for since he put them there in the first place.

- Mitt Romney could NOT run Bain without a $10 million bail-out by tax payers.
- Mitt Romney could NOT get re-elected as governor of Massachusetts because he screwed them.
- Mitt Romney could NOT even carry the Presidential election in his state of Massachusetts.
- Mitt Romney could NOT get elected as President because he is a shyster.
- Paul Ryan could NOT even carry the VP election in his state of Wisconsin.
- Mitt Romney is NOT man enough to even pay a middle class tax rate.
- Mitt Romney is a big time taker & tax mooch.
- Mitt Romney is a job destroyer.
- Mitt Romney is a pension fund raider.
- Mitt Romney never served this country.
- Mitt Romney takes as much as he can from this country.
- Mitt Romney got a lower percent of the Mormon vote than George Bush.
- Mitt Romney comes from a long line of schemers.

[itlltickleurinnerds]

Its not a crach its a dip and now is the time to buy, if you buy when the sky is blue and all looks like its smooth sailing you have bought too high.

[crescent22]

The 94% tax rate was on income above $200,000 in 1944. That's almost $3m inflation-adjusted.

[richrf]

Originally Posted by crescent22

The 94% tax rate was on income above $200,000 in 1944. That's almost $3m inflation-adjusted.

These were the rates during the Eisenhower era (the era of rapid middle class growth). There were also not nearly as many deductions/loop holes for the ultra-rich to take advantage of and also not nearly as much wasteful spending. The range on the right side is the 2008 adjusted income for comparison purposes.

up to $2,000.00 20% up to $37,500.00
$2,000.01 – $4,000.00 22% $37,500 – 75,000
$4,000.01 – $6,000.00 26% $75,000 – 112,500
$6,000.01 – $8,000.00 30% $112,500 – 150,000
$8,000.01 – $10,000.00 34% $150,000 – 187,500
$10,000.01 – $12,000.00 38% $187,500 – 225,000
$12,000.01 – $14,000.00 43% $225,000 – 262,500
$14,000.01 – $16,000.00 47% $262,500 – 300,000
$16,000.01 – $18,000.00 50% $300,000 – 337,500
$18,000.01 – $20,000.00 53% $337,500 – 375,000
$20,000.01 – $22,000.00 56% $375,000 – 412,500
$22,000.01 – $26,000.00 59% $412,500 – 487,500
$26,000.01 – $32,000.00 62% $487,500 – 600,000
$32,000.01 – $38,000.00 65% $600,000 – 712,500
$38,000.01 – $44,000.00 69% $712,500 – 825,000
$44,000.01 – $50,000.00 72% $825,000 – 937,500
$50,000.01 – $60,000.00 75% $937,500 – 1,125,000
$60,000.01 – $70,000.00 78% $1,125,000 – 1,312,500
$70,000.01 – $80,000.00 81% $1,312,500 – 1,500,000
$80,000.01 – $90,000.00 84% $1,500,000 – $1,687,500
$90,000.01 – $100,000.00 87% $1,687,500 – $1,875,000
$100,000.01 – $150,000.00 89% $1,875,000 – $2,812,500
$150,000.01 – $ 200,000.00 90% $2,812,500 – $3,750,000
$200,000.01 or more 91%

[bradykp]

Originally Posted by Jesse69

After Obama got re-elected the stock market crashed... Anyone know why?

it wasn't a crash. stocks receded because of various reasons. European data is not positive right now, which isn't helping stocks. Some earnings releases were disappointing, and consumer sales in October suffered because of the Hurrican. The election is a blip in the overall quantity of data that goes into stock prices.

To me? Buying opportunity!

[bradykp]

Originally Posted by 16trillionandcounting

Really so if income over a million was taxed at 90% for an example, you'd still spend time and effort attempting to make more money when your share of your work is 10%?

if i'm running a pizza place, and a customer walks in and orders the pizza in october or november that puts me over $1,000,000 in income for the year....i'm making the pizza and selling it to him. if i don't sell it to him, he'll drive down the road to get the pizza from the guy who will. if there's not a guy who will, he'll go to the grocery store, buy the ingredients, and make the pizza at home and maybe think...if bradykp is going to stop making pizza in october every year because he's made enough income, maybe i'll open up a pizza place to compete with him.

so, while i might not work as hard to sell pizzas once i hit that income threshold - someone is going to meet the demand for the product.

[richrf]

Originally Posted by bradykp

To me? Buying opportunity!

The Dow Jones Transportation Average would indicate otherwise. The worldwide market contraction may be catching up to the market. The market can be levitated just so long by the Fed printing money machine.

At some point, the distortions caused by these policies (basically redistributing money from the middle class to the top 1%) must be reflected in real market prices. The Hostess situation is a classic example of a company trying to cut labor and costs in order to achieve profit margins to a point that it goes out of business. Other companies will unquestionably follow suit. Growth by growing debt is untenable. That has been the U.S. trajectory for four years. All good things must come to an end.

[richrf]

Originally Posted by bradykp

if i'm running a pizza place, and a customer walks in and orders the pizza in october or november that puts me over $1,000,000 in income for the year....i'm making the pizza and selling it to him. if i don't sell it to him, he'll drive down the road to get the pizza from the guy who will. if there's not a guy who will, he'll go to the grocery store, buy the ingredients, and make the pizza at home and maybe think...if bradykp is going to stop making pizza in october every year because he's made enough income, maybe i'll open up a pizza place to compete with him.

so, while i might not work as hard to sell pizzas once i hit that income threshold - someone is going to meet the demand for the product.

Anyone who has ever owned a business understands this business reality. Politicians have never owned a business. They just get elected to pass pork over to their benefactors.

[bradykp]

Originally Posted by richrf

The Dow Jones Transportation Average would indicate otherwise. The worldwide market contraction may be catching up to the market. The market can be levitated just so long by the Fed printing money machine.

At some point, the distortions caused by these policies (basically redistributing money from the middle class to the top 1%) must be reflected in real market prices. The Hostess situation is a classic example of a company trying to cut labor and costs in order to achieve profit margins to a point that it goes out of business. Other companies will unquestionably follow suit. Growth by growing debt is untenable. That has been the U.S. trajectory for four years. All good things must come to an end.

so you don't believe that someone will buy the Hostess brand and bring it out of bankruptcy? Inept management isn't a sign that the economy sucks...it's a sign that they need different people running the business.

Look at all the companies sitting on cash and investing in their companies. Look at VZW and ATT building out their LTE networks, and margins are at record highs. Even Apple, which has had some recent missteps, is doing pretty darn good. People are getting more comfortable spending in the U.S., and you still have growth in Latin America and Africa and Asia. Europe hurts the markets right now, but it's not the entire story.