Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't say anything about that, gwynedd1; I simply pointed out that the wealthy pay for this deficit. The masses pay hardly any taxes at all. The people who actually pay the taxes have every right to protest-- or not-- how their tax dollars are being spent. The reality is, we would have a difficult time making the wealthy pay taxes. Their tax dollars make prisons possible and their money makes flight to a more sympathetic venue an easy feat. Are the masses going to spend their limited tax dollars imprisoning wealthy tax protesters who're tired of subsidizing lower classes that hate and scorn them?
The top 1% of Americans already pay more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%. Obama wants them to pay more. What if they just say no?
Hi goodbyehollywood,
Actually this is over stated. Since most of the wealthy do not keep their wealth in dollars they avoid the 8% or so real inflation tax not to mention the payroll tax. Considering which class you speak of with foundations and trusts many pay no taxes at all since they merely control its wealth but do not have it in their names and is not taxable. That was the Rockefeller innovation. This is to say nothing about the military that is vastly underpaid due to an irrational sense of patriotism. The bottom 50% also do not hire illegal aliens that pass on medical and educational costs to the rest of us.
Many of the government institutions do not even serve our interests. Do I gain from corn, and sugar subsidies? That is recycled back to the wealthy classes as are most government expenditures. Ross Perot was rich and as a government contractor, it was all recycled back to him.
Like most philanthropies, the Gates Foundation gives away at least 5% of its worth every year, to avoid paying most taxes. In 2005, it granted nearly $1.4 billion. It awards grants mainly in support of global health initiatives, for efforts to improve public education in the United States, and for social welfare programs in the Pacific Northwest.
It invests the other 95% of its worth. This endowment is managed by Bill Gates Investments, which handles Gates' personal fortune. Monica Harrington, a senior policy officer at the foundation, said the investment managers had one goal: returns "that will allow for the continued funding of foundation programs and grant making." Bill and Melinda Gates require the managers to keep a highly diversified portfolio, but make no specific directives.
Since he controls the foundation he may use all of is assets yet as a foundation its tax free paying a modest 5% social tax. You didn't think Gates went from a thief and software scam man to a saint? If you think he was always a saint then you don't know him from double space, to blue mountain arts, Java IDE applets not running on Netscape, to hidden APIs and 6 month old specs to competitors and well, its endless...
In the recent anti-trust case it was often stated that government ought not to interfere. If it did not, then you could get a copy of windows and every other intellectual property on the street for a $1 a piece since no interference would not enforce copy write laws with police and court systems. There is heavy reliance on public expenditures. Once again the tax dollars are also entirely recycled into Microsoft.
Thus contribution of the upper 1% is vastly overstated. However don't confuse the wealth made by productivity and wealth made with monoploy power. I was born a conservative republican and was for many years until I understood the difference between free markets and monoploy capitalism. Now I am an odd cross between libratarian and populist. In reality, like Adam Smith.
Now that aside, I do not wish imply that there is no tax they incur or that those that produce should not be rewarded. The problem is we don't have that Adam Smith economic reality of free markets but rather the monopoly capitalism that he was trying to tear down that existed in Britain.
So we essentially have a problem separating real productivity and that gained from artificial monopolies. Going after the "rich" is a bad idea. Going after monopoly capitalism which generate wealth should not be confused with real productivity and the rewards of wealth that go with it. Going after monopoly capitalism will inevitably be going after those who are rich. However we should leave the real wealth creation alone to a large extent.
Most of these charitable foundations are scams by the elite... Clinton foundation, Gates foundation, etc etc... they are just ways to gain leverage and tax shelters as well as becoming "personal" spending accounts.... This is similar to how the "church of scientology" operates... tax shelters... when we start ending "tax havens" like these, the better we will be... how would you like it if a Hedge Fund called itself a "charitable foundation" by giving away 0.0001 percent of its earnings and gain tax-exempt privileges... well, thats what these foundations and "churches" really are...
1. The top 1% of Americans pay more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%.
2. The masses pay hardly any tax at all. In fact, the bottom 50% pay just 3.97% of all federal income taxes.
If you think it's overstated, you can take it up with the IRS.
But, again, if I'm the one contributing the majority of the tax dollars, while many, many Americans pay nothing or next-to-nothing, I have a right to question how my tax dollars are being spent. The stock market is reflecting, in part, some of this displeasure. Of course, this displeasure is going to grow.
And thank you for your insightful, intelligent, and useful business response. I see even senior members can be trolls, sad to say.
By the way - Dow down 140 again this morning. Thanks Obama for talking last night.
Dd, on my level, I do not care how low it goes. As it goes, so goes my competition. I see no loss in a low stock market. My only druthers of the mess is that so many normal working Joes and Janes had not sunk their retirement money into the mess. Thankfully BushCorp was stopped from also sinking Social Security into the Corporate Retardothon.
My point was/is this has little to nothing to do with real world business -- the intended subject of this forum. Instead all this is wall-to-wall OMIGODOBAMATHON Marathon by morons who will not be in any tax applicable bracket, worried about what Obama may say or do, when the entire game was all totally screwed before he got there.
Dd, on my level, I do not care how low it goes. As it goes, so goes my competition. I see no loss in a low stock market. My only druthers of the mess is that so many normal working Joes and Janes had not sunk their retirement money into the mess. Thankfully BushCorp was stopped from also sinking Social Security into the Corporate Retardothon.
My point was/is this has little to nothing to do with real world business -- the intended subject of this forum. Instead all this is wall-to-wall OMIGODOBAMATHON Marathon by morons who will not be in any tax applicable bracket, worried about what Obama may say or do, when the entire game was all totally screwed before he got there.
Overall, a perfect "Political" forum discussion.
Ok that's a fair argument. Yes it's a struggle to seperate business from politics here, and the mod has a sticky about that. But both are intertwinned, particularly nowadays when the government is instituting policies that impact business directly. So I say these are fair discussions.
My interpretation of a political post is like this - you can attack a president's and other politicians economic policies, that's fair game. But once it gets into non-business political ideology (big government vs small, public vs. private healthcare, etc) or just plain non-relevant nonsense (Iraq, "but Bush lied", Obama's minister is racist) then that's when you can send it over to the political forum. That's my opinons anyways.
I try to avoid the politics forum. Some of those people there are out there, the lunatic fringe! For here I see most of the posts are not necessarily picking one party over another, but mostly condeming government and politicians (both parties) in general.
1. The top 1% of Americans pay more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%.
2. The masses pay hardly any tax at all. In fact, the bottom 50% pay just 3.97% of all federal income taxes.
If you think it's overstated, you can take it up with the IRS.
But, again, if I'm the one contributing the majority of the tax dollars, while many, many Americans pay nothing or next-to-nothing, I have a right to question how my tax dollars are being spent. The stock market is reflecting, in part, some of this displeasure. Of course, this displeasure is going to grow.
Hi goodbyehollywood,
I am not entirely sure you got my point. Perhaps I even forgot to leave you a coherent conclusion. Obama is NOT going after all the rich. He is going after a tier of the rich, represented by the productive new wealth. Obama is working for the old money monopoly capitalists who are not exposed hiding behind their trusts and foundations. They are putting the squeeze on the 250k to 5 mil class under them. Thats what this is really about.
It is more teh uncertainity of the plan. The administrtion has most come up with goals but few details of how to get there.The markets can adjust to a actual plan but not to just general statements. Then ther4e is the case of Senators and representative making statem,ent on things like taking over banks recklessly in thier rethoric in their hearings. No one wants to invest i a bank controlled by the Federal governamnt. The campaign is over but it seems the president and many senators and congresss don't know it and only make things worse since they have control how. Really stupid IMO.
Texdav has it right. The market hates uncertainty and the Obama adminastration has no idea what they are going to do. Obama just keeps on campaining and Pelosi is jumping up and down like a monkey. These people make it tricky to try and trade but we are all figuring out how to do it. If we could get them all to stay off the television and just hang out in the white house and play cards the market would turn around.
Someone who gets it. Keeping people in houses that are worth less than they owe makes it worse. It does not even mention that when they do pay the mortgage it sucks even more money out of the economy back into banks that are not making loans....because no one will buy a house that isn't worth the price.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More on "keep people in their homes"
