A. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stock market in search of tax-free profits, creating tremendous�??and immediate�??liquidity in the markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.
Isn’t this just another way of instating a kind of trickle-down economics? Or, as they used to say, horse and sparrow economics?
And, again, in the end doesn’t this widen the gap between the rich and the poor?
In this situation it is to free up capital. People are free to sell assets they would ordinarily not sell because of tax implications.
The Senate just passed a version of the $700 billion goat screw that included a temp ban on the AMT, which is also a measure to free up cash.
The name of this game is to try and entice people with money to spend it. It works every time it is tried.
[/quote]
In the short term maybe.
But I have no faith in the long term promise of this same old rehashed economic policy. It doesn’t do anything in the long run except put more money in the pockets of those who have plenty.
I’m not saying that suspending a tax right now to get money flowing won’t work for right now… but the long term effects are negligible. I’m only beginning to read about this AMT thing, so I’m not going to comment on your specifics, because being a nerdy ass bookworm CPA, you’re obviously going to know more than me about it.
But my question is who’s going to buy it? Times are tight for everyone. The upper middle class isn’t going to run around putting downpayments on new cars with their 2 or 3 thousand you’re giving them back in taxes- they’re going to save it because of worse times ahead.
I know how the very basic theory works, but the fact is that the money doesn’t come down from way up top. Instead of using the trickle down analogy, they should use the “Rain in the desert” analogy… you see it falling, and you know it’s there, but it never gets to where you are…
I’m not sure if I support that bailout or not. I don’t like the idea of putting $700 billion on our heads… and honestly, it’s more my head because I’m way younger than you old fucks.
But to be honest, when it gets to the point now where banks aren’t even lending each other money, and things begin freezing and then shattering, what else can you do but have the government guarantee that this will get paid?
No one likes this shit. No one wants to vote for it. But it is the only solution at this time, I think.
Why not use the rich people’s money to free up the credit crunch instead of putting it on the back of the not-so-rich?
[/quote]
What do you mean by this? How would you be using their money to free up the credit crunch?
It’s hard to do when all the economic problems have been caused by billionaires on Wall Street.
Will I cut my nose to spit my face? Normally yes, but not with this. But I think cutting the golden parachute lines, as well as the backlash from this, will hit them hard enough.
A. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stock market in search of tax-free profits, creating tremendous�??and immediate�??liquidity in the markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.
Isn’t this just another way of instating a kind of trickle-down economics? Or, as they used to say, horse and sparrow economics?
And, again, in the end doesn’t this widen the gap between the rich and the poor?
In this situation it is to free up capital. People are free to sell assets they would ordinarily not sell because of tax implications.
The Senate just passed a version of the $700 billion goat screw that included a temp ban on the AMT, which is also a measure to free up cash.
The name of this game is to try and entice people with money to spend it. It works every time it is tried.
In the short term maybe.
But I have no faith in the long term promise of this same old rehashed economic policy. It doesn’t do anything in the long run except put more money in the pockets of those who have plenty.
I’m not saying that suspending a tax right now to get money flowing won’t work for right now… but the long term effects are negligible. I’m only beginning to read about this AMT thing, so I’m not going to comment on your specifics, because being a nerdy ass bookworm CPA, you’re obviously going to know more than me about it.
The idea is to give people an incentive to buy stuff they probably would not buy without the added incentive of tax breaks. This gets cash moving, which is the supposed intention of the $700 billion ass rape.
But my question is who’s going to buy it? Times are tight for everyone. The upper middle class is going to run around putting downpayments on new cars with their 2 or 3 thousand you’re giving them back in taxes- they’re going to save it because of worse times ahead.
I know how the very basic theory works, but the fact is that the money doesn’t come down from way up top. Instead of using the trickle down analogy, they should use the “Rain in the desert” analogy… you see it falling, and you know it’s there, but it never gets to where you are…
I’m not sure if I support that bailout or not. I don’t like the idea of putting $700 billion on our heads… and honestly, it’s more my head because I’m way younger than you old fucks.
But to be honest, when it gets to the point now where banks are lending each other money, and things begin freezing and then shattering, what else can you do but have the government guarantee that this will get paid?
No one likes this shit. No one wants to vote for it. But it is the only solution at this time, I think.[/quote]
Then you don’t know enough about the situation to participate in this debate.
I’ll pay more in taxes this year than you will in the next 5.
I’ll pay more in the next 5 years than you will in the next 30.
Not bragging, but you really need to pull your head out of your ass and stop allowing your first thought to be “fuck the rich”.
A. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stock market in search of tax-free profits, creating tremendous�??and immediate�??liquidity in the markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.
Isn’t this just another way of instating a kind of trickle-down economics? Or, as they used to say, horse and sparrow economics?
And, again, in the end doesn’t this widen the gap between the rich and the poor?[/quote]
The gap should be wide if not wider. Rich people earn it. The poor are too busy watching Jerry Springer and trying to fuck their neighbor’s wife. Fuck them. The poor deserve to be poor. Life is a battle. What else is new?
Besides, the question remains: if we can fix this with a largely free market solution, why not? I, as a poor person, am completely ok with widening the gap a little farther if it means a better resolution than gov’t bureaucracy screwing things up. In my opinion the less artificial tampering the better. Gov’t action is infamous for unintended consequences (such as this crisis), and I don’t think that more is the best solution.[/quote]
What’s in a free market solution for anyone? There’s too much juicy power to be grabbed by politicians in this to let this out of their grasp.
See, hobble the economy, then declare that free market economics is ‘discredited’ or ‘Bush economics’ and brings on suffering. Scream about how the ‘rich don’t pay their fair share’. You can then do a power grab and get control of a big pot of money.
A. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stock market in search of tax-free profits, creating tremendous�??and immediate�??liquidity in the markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.
Isn’t this just another way of instating a kind of trickle-down economics? Or, as they used to say, horse and sparrow economics?
And, again, in the end doesn’t this widen the gap between the rich and the poor?
The gap should be wide if not wider. Rich people earn it. The poor are too busy watching Jerry Springer and trying to fuck their neighbor’s wife. Fuck them. The poor deserve to be poor. Life is a battle. What else is new?
[/quote]
Is someone talking?
I thought I heard a retarded fringe lunatic stumbling and mumbling something, I guess it was just the wind…
I’ll pay more in taxes this year than you will in the next 5.
I’ll pay more in the next 5 years than you will in the next 30.
[/quote]
First of all, I live in NJ, and in the next 5 years may end up in NY, so no you won’t.
Second of all, you’re talking to a 24-year who’s starting out. You’d better be paying more taxes than me. But you’re not going to be forever, so stop with this.
You being a CPA gives you credit. You paying taxes, like every other moron in the country, does not. Get off it.
That’s not my first thought at all. I’m may be to the left but I’m not a communist.
The basic argument I have is this- again, you’re giving more money to the top 2 percent and saying, “I hope this gets to everyone else”. It’s been proven that it doesnt work when you do it, so why do it again?
This is a free market solution that does the same thing that government has been doing, and it fails.
Give me a rational answer as to why this is wrong.
I’ll pay more in taxes this year than you will in the next 5.
I’ll pay more in the next 5 years than you will in the next 30.
First of all, I live in NJ, and in the next 5 years may end up in NY, so no you won’t.
Second of all, you’re talking to a 24-year who’s starting out. You’d better be paying more taxes than me. But you’re not going to be forever, so stop with this.
You being a CPA gives you credit. You paying taxes, like every other moron in the country, does not. Get off it.
Not bragging, but you really need to pull your head out of your ass and stop allowing your first thought to be “fuck the rich”.
That’s not my first thought at all. I’m may be to the left but I’m not a communist.
The basic argument I have is this- again, you’re giving more money to the top 2 percent and saying, “I hope this gets to everyone else”. It’s been proven that it doesnt work when you do it, so why do it again?
This is a free market solution that does the same thing that government has been doing, and it fails.
Give me a rational answer as to why this is wrong.[/quote]
See? Its all about power. Here’s a Leftist who wants power by bringing down the productive. They want to return to a feudal era when mystics ruled the land, only here its worship of ‘the poor’, instead of worship of God.
I’ll pay more in taxes this year than you will in the next 5.
I’ll pay more in the next 5 years than you will in the next 30.
First of all, I live in NJ, and in the next 5 years may end up in NY, so no you won’t.
Second of all, you’re talking to a 24-year who’s starting out. You’d better be paying more taxes than me. But you’re not going to be forever, so stop with this.
You being a CPA gives you credit. You paying taxes, like every other moron in the country, does not. Get off it.
Not bragging, but you really need to pull your head out of your ass and stop allowing your first thought to be “fuck the rich”.
That’s not my first thought at all. I’m may be to the left but I’m not a communist.
The basic argument I have is this- again, you’re giving more money to the top 2 percent and saying, “I hope this gets to everyone else”. It’s been proven that it doesnt work when you do it, so why do it again?
This is a free market solution that does the same thing that government has been doing, and it fails.
Give me a rational answer as to why this is wrong.[/quote]
First off, trickle down works. To say otherwise is to either show your blind partisanship, or show your age. You are double dipping with reasons to think it does not work.
Secondly, this is not about trickle down.
This is about getting people with the money to spend the money. How’s the easiest way to get rich people to spend their money? Make the possible gain on that money tax free.
Getting you panties in a wad because we are giving a tax break to the rich to get them to spend their cash is like getting pissed because someone with a brick broke your car window to save a child that was locked inside it while the car was on fire.
I’ll pay more in taxes this year than you will in the next 5.
I’ll pay more in the next 5 years than you will in the next 30.
First of all, I live in NJ, and in the next 5 years may end up in NY, so no you won’t.
Second of all, you’re talking to a 24-year who’s starting out. You’d better be paying more taxes than me. But you’re not going to be forever, so stop with this.
You being a CPA gives you credit. You paying taxes, like every other moron in the country, does not. Get off it.
Not bragging, but you really need to pull your head out of your ass and stop allowing your first thought to be “fuck the rich”.
That’s not my first thought at all. I’m may be to the left but I’m not a communist.
The basic argument I have is this- again, you’re giving more money to the top 2 percent and saying, “I hope this gets to everyone else”. It’s been proven that it doesnt work when you do it, so why do it again?
This is a free market solution that does the same thing that government has been doing, and it fails.
Give me a rational answer as to why this is wrong.
First off, trickle down works. To say otherwise is to either show your blind partisanship, or show your age. You are double dipping with reasons to think it does not work.
[/quote]
To demonstrate how trickle down works.
Ladies and Gentlemen, again, the wonders of exponential growth.
Let us say a tax cut for the rich (not giving them more money, just taking away less), brings us on 0.5 more real growth. What will the affect be in 10 years?
Well, if it is 2,5 instead of 2% growth the difference is small. It is 21% real growth versus 28%
In 20 years it would be 48 against 63%v real growth.
In 50 years it would be 269% vs 344%.
Trickle down works. It is just the nature of exponential growth to start small and make a lot of a difference later.
Meaning, give the example above, the American worker could be 3,5 times better off in 50 years than he is now, but he would be only 2,7 better off because his greedy grandfather could not wait for it to trickle down.
That’s not my first thought at all. I’m may be to the left but I’m not a communist.
The basic argument I have is this- again, you’re giving more money to the top 2 percent and saying, “I hope this gets to everyone else”. It’s been proven that it doesnt work when you do it, so why do it again?
[/quote] There not giving anything to top 2 percent…it’s their money.
[quote]
This is a free market solution that does the same thing that government has been doing, and it fails.
Give me a rational answer as to why this is wrong.[/quote]
A free market solution would be to let evil wealthy people and corporations bail themselves out. Not the tax payer. Not the non-tax payer that will also suffer the ill effects of inflation.
[quote]orion wrote:
To demonstrate how trickle down works.
Ladies and Gentlemen, again, the wonders of exponential growth.
Let us say a tax cut for the rich (not giving them more money, just taking away less), brings us on 0.5 more real growth. What will the affect be in 10 years?
Well, if it is 2,5 instead of 2% growth the difference is small. It is 21% real growth versus 28%
In 20 years it would be 48 against 63%v real growth.
In 50 years it would be 269% vs 344%.
Trickle down works. It is just the nature of exponential growth to start small and make a lot of a difference later.
Meaning, give the example above, the American worker could be 3,5 times better off in 50 years than he is now, but he would be only 2,7 better off because his greedy grandfather could not wait for it to trickle down.
[/quote]
We don’t even have to call it trickle down if people don’t like that name. We can call “classic economics”. The only accredited economists to refute this since the 1800s have been the socialists and the Keynesians. People need to quit listening to politicians when it comes to economics.
[quote]dknz13 wrote:
When did it become acceptable to leverage assets, to leverage more assets, to make balance sheets look more substantial on paper without producing anything?[/quote]
December 23, 1913
Enough said.
I can only assume that anyone who doesn’t want the bailout to pass doesn’t understand how our system fundamentally operates.
You people have no idea what you’re asking for. If you get what you want, the entire thing could very well collapse like a house of cards.
Anyone who thinks there’s a safe way out…get real. There is no way out. This system has to be kept going for as long as possible.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
dknz13 wrote:
When did it become acceptable to leverage assets, to leverage more assets, to make balance sheets look more substantial on paper without producing anything?
December 23, 1913
Enough said.
I can only assume that anyone who doesn’t want the bailout to pass doesn’t understand how our system fundamentally operates.
You people have no idea what you’re asking for. If you get what you want, the entire thing could very well collapse like a house of cards.
Anyone who thinks there’s a safe way out…get real. There is no way out. This system has to be kept going for as long as possible.
Or do you want the currency to become worthless?[/quote]
What does a bailout have to do with this? Why does it matter if the gov’t buys it now and sells it later, or the market buys it now?
Letting some of these guys fail will send a signal to the market. Leverage everthing you have and risk failure. Invest with heavily leverage companies and lose your money.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Aren’t you afraid that if the bailout isn’t passed, the financial system may collapse, as major lenders become insoluble?
I think the bailout is a necessity, not an option, in order to keep the system running.
It’s not being done as a reward, just as a way of preserving the system.[/quote]
But the reason why it needs to “collapse” is so that prices can become stabilized once again. The bailout amounts to price fixing. If we bailout now, we will continue to have to bailout, ad infinitum.
PROTOCOL No. 6
[i]1. We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of colossal riches, upon which even large fortunes of the GOYIM will depend to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of the States on the day after the political smash.
You gentlemen here present who are economists, just strike an estimate of the significance of this combination!
In every possible way we must develop the significance of our Super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us.
The aristocracy of the GOYIM as a political force, is dead - We need not take it into account; but as landed proprietors they can still be harmful to us from the fact that they are self-sufficing in the resources upon which they live. It is essential therefore for us at whatever cost to deprive them of their land. This object will be best attained by increasing the burdens upon landed property - in loading lands with debts. These measures will check land-holding and keep it in a state of humble and unconditional submission.
The aristocrats of the GOYIM, being hereditarily incapable of contenting themselves with little, will rapidly burn up and fizzle out.[/i]
PROTOCOL No. 8
[i]2. We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and - THE MAIN THING - MILLIONAIRES, BECAUSE IN SUBSTANCE EVERYTHING WILL BE SETTLED BY THE QUESTION OF FIGURES.
For a time, until there will no longer be any risk in entrusting responsible posts in our State to our brother-Jews, we shall put them in the hands of persons whose past and reputation are such that between them and the people lies an abyss, persons who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear - this in order to make them defend our interests to their last gasp.[/i]
PROTOCOL No. 9
[i]3. For us there are not checks to limit the range of our activity. Our Super-Government subsists in extra-legal conditions which are described in the accepted terminology by the energetic and forcible word - Dictatorship…
The people have raised a howl about the necessity of settling the question of Socialism by way of an international agreement. DIVISION INTO FRACTIONAL PARTIES HAS GIVEN THEM INTO OUR HANDS, FOR, IN ORDER TO CARRY ON A CONTESTED STRUGGLE ONE MUST HAVE MONEY, AND THE MONEY IS ALL IN OUR HANDS.[/i]
Perfect execution, don’t you think so rain?
[quote]“The indication that they are highly satisfied is that they are not only not doing anything to relieve the world situation, but are apparently willing to have it made worse. The privations which are scheduled for it (unless Gentile flabbiness before the Jewish power, high and low, receives a new backbone), will bring the United States to the verge, if not across the very line, of Bolshevism.”[/quote] --Henry Ford
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
dknz13 wrote:
When did it become acceptable to leverage assets, to leverage more assets, to make balance sheets look more substantial on paper without producing anything?
December 23, 1913
Enough said.
I can only assume that anyone who doesn’t want the bailout to pass doesn’t understand how our system fundamentally operates.
You people have no idea what you’re asking for. If you get what you want, the entire thing could very well collapse like a house of cards.
Anyone who thinks there’s a safe way out…get real. There is no way out. This system has to be kept going for as long as possible.
Or do you want the currency to become worthless?
What does a bailout have to do with this? Why does it matter if the gov’t buys it now and sells it later, or the market buys it now?
Letting some of these guys fail will send a signal to the market. Leverage everthing you have and risk failure. Invest with heavily leverage companies and lose your money.[/quote]
Shouldnt a system fail when people, governments, institutions are buying products and services that they can’t afford using debt that is exorbitant. Our society doesn’t save, uses ridiculous amounts of leverage and no one is held accountable.
As an example, no 18-24 year old kid should be driving a BMW or a Range Rover, but that happens in every suburban town in America. Nor should they know what a $12 beer tastes like or any of the golden, silver spoon standards. We live a petulant and spoiled life style that is unsustainable. It disgusts me. What does hard work mean? What are rewards if all you’ve known is opulence? Better yet, what is sacrifice? Debt, credit, leverage are grossly overused to maintain a lifestyle of extravagance.
Let me give you a better example of what I am talking about using myself as an example.
I am currently in my first year of law school. I work full-time, maintain a full class schedule, serve on the board of my old college, lift weights three to four times a week, play rugby, baseball and ice hockey. I also make time for my family, my friends, and my relationships. I graduated college Summa Cum Laude, National Honors. I drive a Honda civic with dinks and dents. I have a loose change bag in my car and my bed room. I pay off my credit card bill in full every month. I worked full-time in college, got scholarships, and paid for school. I am already making payments on my law school loans and I save ten percent of my pay check every month to buy a house, and an additional 10 percent for my IRA. I am 22 years old. I am proud by nature and I make no excuses for saying that.
Why does this matter? I don’t want to some fat cat dick head on Wall Street getting any type of lame ass bail out from the taxes I pay because he couldn’t be as responsible as I have been. I don’t want my parents, who have paid their modest mortgage off and have made wise money choices, to support the bailout either. I dont want my grandparents who migrated here from Germany and have worked their asses off to do the same.
SHOVE THAT PATHETIC BAIL-OUT UP SOME LEVERAGED, DEBT LADEN, WALL STREET, IVY LEAGUE, DICK HEAD’s ASS.
While I am at it, therapy for the soul. We have the most successful country ever developed in the world. Our country has done more to advance democracy, capitalism, military, health care, education, and the list goes… and our two best candidates for President are Barack Obama and John McCain. Last night we had a vice presidential debate and Sarah Palin said “Golly Gee”. Sit down with a nuclear Iran or Pakiston and tell their dictator in chief “Golly Gee” or that you are proud “Hockey Mom” and I hope you are at the epicenter of their warhead. Seriously.
I am an equal opportunity basher today, Biden is a rich bastard who graduated from Archmere academy. That is about ten minutes from my apartment and has iron gates and manicured lawns. Tell a construction worker’s son, public school kid like me that there are schools with iron gates, manicured lawns, and a waitlist to attend a “Catholic College Preparatory School in the Norbertine Tradition” and ill punch you right between the eyes.
Lets keep going… how about the gym… how often do I/we go to the gym and see no one sweat? How about run sprints? How about over buckle over with cramps? What about deadlifts? What about Squats? Soul sucking leeches, no wonder we buy shit we can’t afford to make our stupid ass lives a little more meaningful. How else could we justify that beer gut and ugly girlfriend?
Lets keep going… how about our government fiefdoms? Property taxes on people who can’t afford to pay. Healthcare our senior citizens can’t recognize. Social security benefits that get dragged into shit it doesn’t belong in. And we spew about raising taxes or lack of money. What about the money we waste on shit that doesn’t matter? Its amazing how fast 700 billion appears when its printed. Talk about worthless money.
Thats about all the negativity I can reasonably handle today. I had a mid-term last night til 10 and I had to be up for work by 630 this morning. I am glad I have to be accountable, even if it is just to myself, at least someone is.