Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Millonaire tax a bust?

Last response: in News & Leisure
Share
October 9, 2011 4:38:47 AM

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/obamas-millionaire-tax-co...

some cold hard facts for you guys. seems the millionaire tax will keep us at the same spot for 4 months, that is for a years worth of taxes.

More about : millonaire tax bust

October 9, 2011 5:07:32 AM

Tax, tax, tax, tax, tax. Fair, fair, fair, fair, fair. Green energy good, oil bad. Millionaires and Billionaires making $250,000/yr.Bad! Millionaire Wall St. and Hollywood Obama supporters, Goood! Corporate jets, Badd! AF1, Good!
Flaunting the U.S Constitution, OK for Obama. Wanting adherance to the Constitution, Bad for Tea Party.

I'm confused. Does my avatar help?
October 9, 2011 5:18:54 AM

Then that only leaves 8 months of accumulated debt to worry about, rather than 12. 8 months is closer to zero, and well we want to at least get to 0 sometime in our lifetime or we'll end up like Greece
October 9, 2011 5:21:25 AM

megamanx00 said:
Then that only leaves 8 months of accumulated debt to worry about, rather than 12. 8 months is closer to zero, and well we want to at least get to 0 sometime in our lifetime or we'll end up like Greece

and how will we get the extra 8 months?
October 9, 2011 5:27:50 AM

I'm rather more discussed with the fact that income tax is not supported by ONE law in the US and so many people keep paying it.
October 9, 2011 5:33:10 AM

Mastervivi10 said:
I'm rather more discussed with the fact that income tax is not supported by ONE law in the US and so many people keep paying it.

that is technically true.
October 9, 2011 6:03:35 AM

mjmjpfaff said:
and how will we get the extra 8 months?


You have to take the race a lap at a time. Besides, even if there were two more programs to deal with the other 8 months you'd ask the same question for each.
October 9, 2011 6:33:06 AM

Reducing the deficit just means that we are going broke a liitle more slowly.

We need a balanced budget amendment with teeth.
October 9, 2011 7:38:55 AM

I've got an idea. On top of raising taxes on high earners to what they are for low earners, we could divert defense spending to something productive.
October 9, 2011 7:55:24 AM

Hey Chimp! Hummers, 737's. MRE's, low cost housing, watches with second hands and bubble gum!
OK, let's all give our money to the gov't so they can scrape off 35% to 50% before they give it to their 'consituents, the poor, elderly, and indigent. Who are no better off now than they were 60 years ago!!!
October 9, 2011 8:20:20 AM

DelroyMonjo said:
Hey Chimp! Hummers, 737's. MRE's, low cost housing, watches with second hands and bubble gum!
OK, let's all give our money to the gov't so they can scrape off 35% to 50% before they give it to their 'consituents, the poor, elderly, and indigent. Who are no better off now than they were 60 years ago!!!

Is that supposed to be an argument against taxes?
October 9, 2011 4:02:20 PM

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

N Chompsky


October 10, 2011 3:06:23 PM

Nim Chimpsky said:
I've got an idea. On top of raising taxes on high earners to what they are for low earners, we could divert defense spending to something productive.


The top 25% of wage earners pay 86% of the federal tax burden. The bottom 50% pay ZERO in federal income taxes.

Not sure what your getting at. We already have wealth redistribution. Anymore, and people will just pull an Atlas shrugged and stop trying which will further degrade the tax base.

Top earners are already give over a third of their earned income to federal government. How much more do you want them taxed? 50%? 75%?
October 10, 2011 4:38:29 PM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
The top 25% of wage earners pay 86% of the federal tax burden. The bottom 50% pay ZERO in federal income taxes.

Not sure what your getting at. We already have wealth redistribution. Anymore, and people will just pull an Atlas shrugged and stop trying which will further degrade the tax base.

Top earners are already give over a third of their earned income to federal government. How much more do you want them taxed? 50%? 75%?

That's because they have a lot of money. You have to remember that they actually pay a lower percentage of their income. I don't think that's just, do you?

That's not true: we have actually asked people, and they say they'd rather be taxed more. Doesn't it sound kind of ridiculous to you when Bill O'Reilly says he'll "stop trying" if you tax him too much?

No one is proposing a 50% or above tax rate. The top bracket is currently at 35%, but if you read Warren Buffet's article, he points out that investors can avoid that essentially by reinvesting in themselves. He himself paid only 17.4% of his taxable income; you probably paid more than that.
October 10, 2011 5:08:19 PM

1. I have no idea what you talking about in your first sentence. The rich are paying a lower percentage? How do you explain the 35% top bracket.

2. It is true and is already happening. Entrepeneurs are calling it quits. People have resigned themselves to stop even trying to find a job and just collect benefits. My daughter is looking at an effective lifetime tax rate of 80% if things dont change. I asked her if she would continue to work if she only got to keep $0.20 on the dollar and she replied with a big hell no.

3. As I said the upper crust is already paying more than a third of their income to the federal government. How much more should they pay?

4. Warren Buffet does not pay income taxes becuase he has no earned income as defined by the tax code. He pays taxes on investment returns (capital gains). If he wants to pay more, there is nothing stopping him. There is even a little box on your tax returns where you can "contribute" more if you really want to.

5. My effective federal earned income tax rate after deductions last year was 2.76%. God bless the mortgage interest deduction.
October 10, 2011 5:12:37 PM

We could use some of the $1,264,585,138,992 spent on war since 2001.

Wouldn't ending frivolous spending make a safer country?

http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Look on the bright side all of us only owe about 131,000$, so whenever you can get that money..........
October 10, 2011 5:30:41 PM

To the guy above, you kind of got that figure wrong. Oil executive make that much money IN A DAY. And half the oil companies profits are subsidized by AMERICAN TAX PAYERS. The system is completely ******* broken and corrupt. The crash is coming. Hold on to your butts. And apparently cutting social security for all those lazy ******* old people in their perscription drug induced comas is far more important then cutting back our military industrial complex. I mean, god forbid we put those engineers and developers to work benefiting our society at home instead of working on ever more lethal killing machines. Thus is man's nature I guess.
October 10, 2011 5:39:19 PM

who is that fella wanting to do the 7 7 and 7 taxes.
October 10, 2011 5:45:33 PM

Agold said:
To the guy above, you kind of got that figure wrong. Oil executive make that much money IN A DAY. And half the oil companies profits are subsidized by AMERICAN TAX PAYERS. The system is completely ******* broken and corrupt. The crash is coming. Hold on to your butts. And apparently cutting social security for all those lazy ******* old people in their perscription drug induced comas is far more important then cutting back our military industrial complex. I mean, god forbid we put those engineers and developers to work benefiting our society at home instead of working on ever more lethal killing machines. Thus is man's nature I guess.



I'm sorry what subsidies do American oil companies get exactly? I've looked and can't find any. Unless you mean them being able to deduct income earned over seas? In which case, every company gets that same deduction; it's the law, not a loophole.
October 10, 2011 5:47:42 PM

spentshells said:
who is that fella wanting to do the 7 7 and 7 taxes.



Herman Cain and it is 9,9,9. 9% personal income tax, 9% corporate tax, and 9% national sales tax (VAT).

If this was actually implemented and guarnteed for say 10 years; watch this economy take off, and the world's economy take off as a result.
October 10, 2011 5:49:11 PM

Don't get why Yanks jump to the defense of Millionaires.

And as for the incapability to understand why Millionaires pay less % of the income in tax, despite being on a higher tax rate.

Consider how much someone on a no/low tax rate has to spend on 'luxuries' or 'investments' as a % of their income.

Which may be why some consider that basics such as food/water/shelter shouldn't be a business to make profit (unless ofcourse you talk about luxury food/water/shelter).

That way, I guess everyone could start equal, with basics provided and from which they can start on their way to the 'American Dream'.

Those with money, exert a certain control on us, and privatising things that you would consider 'essential' to existing can put you in a position you cannot get out, so you can be continually milked.

October 10, 2011 5:56:14 PM

The issue comes down to a lot of things. It is hard for media to explain it to people since the media has to be simple for the simple folks to understand. Good vs. Evil. Right vs Wrong.

1) You have to make taxes fair for all. No easy solution here so we have to work on what we know works and modify from there. Smaller changes better than drastic.
2) Corporations are not people.
3) All election fundings should have a limit. We need more options than 2 parties, media has to push this.
4) Folks need to understand we can't all be bill gates. So we need to fund social programs to help other people out. It's easy to ignore the issues but make the effort to go see why skid row in LA is the way it is. Most of those people have serious mental etc issue. They need support and as humans and a community we need to help them.
5) we need to recognize other countries soverignty and support then, instead of invading and playing around in their politics
6) Fair trade? A lot of power countries subsidize food, resource production etc. The world need to bring the countries out of poverty and stop explotiing workers.
7) Capitalism benefits a few while exploiting billions. While I don't honestly believe there is an alternative that really works a middle needs to be made that promotes capitalism but also giving back a form of socialism ( the dreaded S word ). Also realize that Steve Jobs doesn't need 10 billion dollars, he needed to give back.
October 10, 2011 6:21:17 PM

Corporations are people, sorry. How are they any different from special interest groups we have now? Corporations are publicly traded, thus THE PEOPLE own the company. Ever go to a shareholder meeting before? The company panders to THE PEOPLE because without them, there is no company. Corporation = People. And said company has the best interests of all its shareholders in mind and thus will aggressively lobby congress to improve the stakes and lives of THE PEOPLE. It is NO DIFFERENT from the special interest groups we have now. zero difference.
October 10, 2011 6:29:08 PM

wunderkinder said:
The issue comes down to a lot of things. It is hard for media to explain it to people since the media has to be simple for the simple folks to understand. Good vs. Evil. Right vs Wrong.

1) You have to make taxes fair for all. No easy solution here so we have to work on what we know works and modify from there. Smaller changes better than drastic.
2) Corporations are not people.
3) All election fundings should have a limit. We need more options than 2 parties, media has to push this.
4) Folks need to understand we can't all be bill gates. So we need to fund social programs to help other people out. It's easy to ignore the issues but make the effort to go see why skid row in LA is the way it is. Most of those people have serious mental etc issue. They need support and as humans and a community we need to help them.
5) we need to recognize other countries soverignty and support then, instead of invading and playing around in their politics
6) Fair trade? A lot of power countries subsidize food, resource production etc. The world need to bring the countries out of poverty and stop explotiing workers.
7) Capitalism benefits a few while exploiting billions. While I don't honestly believe there is an alternative that really works a middle needs to be made that promotes capitalism but also giving back a form of socialism ( the dreaded S word ). Also realize that Steve Jobs doesn't need 10 billion dollars, he needed to give back.


Capitalism does NOT only benefit the few. Just ask the Chinese.
October 10, 2011 7:10:38 PM

Quote:
Also realize that Steve Jobs doesn't need 10 billion dollars, he needed to give back.


Jobs could have ended his career as a businessman, folded up and quit working when He had 250 million.
October 10, 2011 7:12:07 PM

billybobser said:
Don't get why Yanks jump to the defense of Millionaires.

And as for the incapability to understand why Millionaires pay less % of the income in tax, despite being on a higher tax rate.

Consider how much someone on a no/low tax rate has to spend on 'luxuries' or 'investments' as a % of their income.

Which may be why some consider that basics such as food/water/shelter shouldn't be a business to make profit (unless ofcourse you talk about luxury food/water/shelter).

That way, I guess everyone could start equal, with basics provided and from which they can start on their way to the 'American Dream'.

Those with money, exert a certain control on us, and privatising things that you would consider 'essential' to existing can put you in a position you cannot get out, so you can be continually milked.
Not being a Yank, not being intimate with American society, and not knowing what it actually means to be an American, I will forgive your gross misunderstanding of the issues you comment on.
October 10, 2011 10:54:41 PM

wanamingo said:
We could use some of the $1,264,585,138,992 spent on war since 2001.

Wouldn't ending frivolous spending make a safer country?

http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Look on the bright side all of us only owe about 131,000$, so whenever you can get that money..........

there are just some things that you cant fix. one of them would be the middle east. they need to try and figure it out for themselves.
October 10, 2011 11:01:49 PM

billybobser said:
Don't get why Yanks jump to the defense of Millionaires.

And as for the incapability to understand why Millionaires pay less % of the income in tax, despite being on a higher tax rate.

Consider how much someone on a no/low tax rate has to spend on 'luxuries' or 'investments' as a % of their income.

Which may be why some consider that basics such as food/water/shelter shouldn't be a business to make profit (unless ofcourse you talk about luxury food/water/shelter).

That way, I guess everyone could start equal, with basics provided and from which they can start on their way to the 'American Dream'.

Those with money, exert a certain control on us, and privatising things that you would consider 'essential' to existing can put you in a position you cannot get out, so you can be continually milked.

that would not be an american dream. it would be a communist dream.
October 10, 2011 11:53:06 PM

Most of us know someone whos done well, whether it was a friend from school, elsewheres, family , or someone from a family.
When success is this close, it makes it a possibility, not a dream
It isnt easy, sometimes right place right time, luck, born to do it etc, it happens, people have monetary success, and to wish harm, or take away from them shows more about those whod do so, than those whose earned it
October 11, 2011 12:21:37 AM

billybobser said:
Don't get why Yanks jump to the defense of Millionaires.

And as for the incapability to understand why Millionaires pay less % of the income in tax, despite being on a higher tax rate.

Consider how much someone on a no/low tax rate has to spend on 'luxuries' or 'investments' as a % of their income.

Which may be why some consider that basics such as food/water/shelter shouldn't be a business to make profit (unless ofcourse you talk about luxury food/water/shelter).

That way, I guess everyone could start equal, with basics provided and from which they can start on their way to the 'American Dream'.

Those with money, exert a certain control on us, and privatising things that you would consider 'essential' to existing can put you in a position you cannot get out, so you can be continually milked.



How soon did most people forget about the American Dream. Everybody wants to be rich but doesn't want to work for it at all. This totally disgusts me. This is a battle of haves and have nots. Rather than people just bitching about things like this, go do something profitable and make some money. Everybody expects to get rich quick and do as little work as they can. The thing is that US politicians don't pay taxes on their income that they "earn" by "representing" the people. What would save a lot of money is not giving them a "retirement" check for 100% of what they make forever. Damn we could get out of debt pretty quick then!
October 11, 2011 12:49:18 AM

tacobravo said:
How soon did most people forget about the American Dream. Everybody wants to be rich but doesn't want to work for it at all. This totally disgusts me. This is a battle of haves and have nots. Rather than people just bitching about things like this, go do something profitable and make some money. Everybody expects to get rich quick and do as little work as they can.
Now hold on there tacocravo! How dare you insinuate that my overpriced education did not guarantee me a job starting at least $80K a year! How dare you imply that I don't deserve at least a Manager level position fresh out of college. Doesn't matter what the product or service is because I learned all the formulas and business models, and I got an "A" in my Advanced Social Economics for Global Business class. Doesn't matter that I have no practical experience, my MBA has given me all the theory I need to know how to run a company. /sarcasm


October 11, 2011 12:51:33 AM

I've heard the term "American Dream" mentioned a few times in this thread. I'm interested to know what others think the American dream is.

Everyone is encouraged to respond no matter your nationality.
October 11, 2011 1:06:54 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
I've heard the term "American Dream" mentioned a few times in this thread. I'm interested to know what others think the American dream is.

Everyone is encouraged to respond no matter your nationality.

that is a good question i am going to have to think about that...
October 11, 2011 1:46:17 AM

To me, its always been the ability for everyone to own their own house, if they take care of their finances of course, and not blow all their money like a junkie
October 11, 2011 1:46:22 AM

Well as a matter of fact the American is in fact that, a dream....
A dream that one day you will find a great job.
A dream that one day you will find the perfect woman.
A dream that you will start a family, go on vacations, and live comfortably..
Fact is unless you were born to entitlement or struck gold with brilliant ideas or just had a head start in an emerging market.. It's very hard to make it..

But wait people say it's not that hard go to college and get a good job?
Fact is it's hard to go to college when your born in the bottom rungs of society, once you reach working age one is obligated to begin working and help your family.. Not only that but college costs money.. Education isn't free folks! So now you're taking out loans putting yourself into debt working a job and struggling paycheck to paycheck..

Well if you make it through those days the job isnt done yet, depending on degree and time it takes to even find a job, one will probably be in over $30,000 in dept for a simple RN nursing degree or up to $100,000 depending on length and cost of schools..
Now your income is being sucked up for the next 5 years or so and by the time the debts gone your 30 years old..

Now your living the dream aren't you?

Now for people who have the connections to the jobs, the schooling, theyre simply guided through no worries about debt mother and father can pay for that..
Im not saying all rich people pay for everything for their children but some do..

But what do I know, it all comes down to laziness and no drive.. People seem to be content with their lifestyle in the bottom rungs, but those who yearn to be in the top are simply unable to because once a corporation takes over a market there is no room for local businesses and manufacturing and all the ones around have a stranglehold on it...

Just a little about what I though mostly me rambling on..
October 11, 2011 1:57:30 AM

I find it strange that there is always talk about how everybody needs to go to college to get a great job! Truth is most people that are in college don't need to be in college (trust me I know). My mother and father cannot pay my college debit but I know I will snag a pretty good job went I graduate soon. Also I am an engineering major so that's guaranteed. At my university and as well as most universities, most people who graduate with engineering degrees are not US citizens but citizens of other countries. That's stupid. There are so many damn people out there who graduate that are lawyers and not enough people that actually can help this damn country out. It seems like the American Dream has become a sense of "how quick can I get rich without any effort attached" like winning the lottery since they don't want to work hard.

To tell me that people cannot find a job is stupid. They don't want to find a job. I was laid off of my job for several months and the attitudes of the people truly disgust me. They "attempted" to look for jobs just to satisfy the requirements of getting unemployment. I have talked to many people who are satisfied being unemployed. Hell even I was getting a pretty decent check sitting on my ass doing nothing. Seems to me that the true American Dream is to sit on one's ass, bitch about things that don't concern them, eat and getting fat, complaining about immigrants taking jobs, complaining about the rich and how they have all the money and don't pay their fair share, and in the process wasting my taxpayer's dollars in doing so.
October 11, 2011 3:24:21 AM

trumbo091 said:
Well as a matter of fact the American is in fact that, a dream....
A dream that one day you will find a great job.
A dream that one day you will find the perfect woman.
A dream that you will start a family, go on vacations, and live comfortably..
Fact is unless you were born to entitlement or struck gold with brilliant ideas or just had a head start in an emerging market.. It's very hard to make it..

But wait people say it's not that hard go to college and get a good job?
Fact is it's hard to go to college when your born in the bottom rungs of society, once you reach working age one is obligated to begin working and help your family.. Not only that but college costs money.. Education isn't free folks! So now you're taking out loans putting yourself into debt working a job and struggling paycheck to paycheck..

Well if you make it through those days the job isnt done yet, depending on degree and time it takes to even find a job, one will probably be in over $30,000 in dept for a simple RN nursing degree or up to $100,000 depending on length and cost of schools..
Now your income is being sucked up for the next 5 years or so and by the time the debts gone your 30 years old..

Now your living the dream aren't you?

Now for people who have the connections to the jobs, the schooling, theyre simply guided through no worries about debt mother and father can pay for that..
Im not saying all rich people pay for everything for their children but some do..

But what do I know, it all comes down to laziness and no drive.. People seem to be content with their lifestyle in the bottom rungs, but those who yearn to be in the top are simply unable to because once a corporation takes over a market there is no room for local businesses and manufacturing and all the ones around have a stranglehold on it...

Just a little about what I though mostly me rambling on..

im growing up knowin my parents wont be able to pay for my college. with the recession went my parents college savings for me. there are not a lot of people like me in school. i am not the smartest in my class but i work the hardest. I have gotten all a's and i am taking all the honors and ap classes i can. i feel i can get a full ride scholarship to many decent schools. schools are easy to get into and easy to pay for if people work as hard as i do. but like you said people are content with laziness and lack of success.
October 11, 2011 3:32:25 AM

Why go with calculations when we have history which doesn't rely on assumptions..... put the tax rates where they were the last time we had a budget surplus ...... pre the 1st Bush.

As for college ....any one have any idea why college loans run 9 - 10 % while the prime sits at 1/2 % .... who's pocketing that 9.5 % ?
October 11, 2011 3:32:46 AM

billybobser said:
Don't get why Yanks jump to the defense of Millionaires.

And as for the incapability to understand why Millionaires pay less % of the income in tax, despite being on a higher tax rate.

Consider how much someone on a no/low tax rate has to spend on 'luxuries' or 'investments' as a % of their income.

Which may be why some consider that basics such as food/water/shelter shouldn't be a business to make profit (unless ofcourse you talk about luxury food/water/shelter).

That way, I guess everyone could start equal, with basics provided and from which they can start on their way to the 'American Dream'.

Those with money, exert a certain control on us, and privatising things that you would consider 'essential' to existing can put you in a position you cannot get out, so you can be continually milked.


Well its simple because the millionaires are the ones keeping us employed, if they dont make money the rest of us don't make money (unless working for the gov)
October 11, 2011 3:33:07 AM

tacobravo said:
I find it strange that there is always talk about how everybody needs to go to college to get a great job! Truth is most people that are in college don't need to be in college (trust me I know). My mother and father cannot pay my college debit but I know I will snag a pretty good job went I graduate soon. Also I am an engineering major so that's guaranteed. At my university and as well as most universities, most people who graduate with engineering degrees are not US citizens but citizens of other countries. That's stupid. There are so many damn people out there who graduate that are lawyers and not enough people that actually can help this damn country out. It seems like the American Dream has become a sense of "how quick can I get rich without any effort attached" like winning the lottery since they don't want to work hard.

To tell me that people cannot find a job is stupid. They don't want to find a job. I was laid off of my job for several months and the attitudes of the people truly disgust me. They "attempted" to look for jobs just to satisfy the requirements of getting unemployment. I have talked to many people who are satisfied being unemployed. Hell even I was getting a pretty decent check sitting on my ass doing nothing. Seems to me that the true American Dream is to sit on one's ass, bitch about things that don't concern them, eat and getting fat, complaining about immigrants taking jobs, complaining about the rich and how they have all the money and don't pay their fair share, and in the process wasting my taxpayer's dollars in doing so.

you are correct people do not need to go to college to have a great job. a viable option for many people is to learn a trade. We will always need electricians, mechanics, and plumbers. heck they aren't the greatest jobs but if you work your way up you can easily make 100k and up (before taxes).
October 11, 2011 3:40:59 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
I've heard the term "American Dream" mentioned a few times in this thread. I'm interested to know what others think the American dream is.

Everyone is encouraged to respond no matter your nationality.


I guess its simple I believe that you should work hard for lng enough to pay for your family then be able to retire with diginity after giving a company 30-40 years of my life and not lose my pension while the guy who crashed the company gets paid out a 20 million dollar bonus, and to see part of the profit margins produced by a company being more and more profitable every year.

If the company makes 8% growth at year end my family get to see a 8% over last years wage instead of 2.5 or less.
October 11, 2011 3:49:51 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Herman Cain and it is 9,9,9. 9% personal income tax, 9% corporate tax, and 9% national sales tax (VAT).

If this was actually implemented and guarnteed for say 10 years; watch this economy take off, and the world's economy take off as a result.


Even I as a canadian and this would not appl to me it seems that there is a lot to be gained by putting more moeny in peoples pockets then the final 9% sales tax brings in just as much as before only people are able to save more for themselves and that is a good thing
October 11, 2011 4:15:20 AM

spentshells said:
Even I as a canadian and this would not appl to me it seems that there is a lot to be gained by putting more moeny in peoples pockets then the final 9% sales tax brings in just as much as before only people are able to save more for themselves and that is a good thing

its ingenious. that is real change for you not that bs obama was throwing out. all the change he brought was even more spending.
October 11, 2011 5:25:12 AM

Stand by for RANT:

The primary reasons I am politically conservative (well, more than I used to be) are:
1. I am tired of supporting the 48% of the US that do not pay federal income taxes. Among other things, I realize that anybody, through no fault of his own, can end up needing help. But when you have third generation welfare families, there is something wrong with the system.
2. And as a tax payer, I am really tired of bailing out rescuing people from their own bad decisions. I bought a house about 10 years ago. Did everything right - did not buy more house than I needed, put 20% down, and financed only the principle for 15 years (did not finance first year insurance or taxes).And yet, I'm stuck with the bailout bill.

Cash for Clunkers - I have a 1991 Camry (born in a non-union auto plant in Lexington, Kentucky). Because it still gets better than 30 mpg on the highway at 65 mph, it doesn't qualify for the program. Yet I'm helping to pay for down payments for people with 5 year old, Detroit built gas guzzlers.

I am also apparently one of those people who is delaying the recovery because I am pretty much sitting on my money instead of spending it. Except for a house payment, we have no consumer debt. we do not carry a balance on our credit cards.

I remember when saving was good.

I am also the first in my family with a college degree - mostly at night in Europe while I was in the Army there. That's rough when you are working a 60+ hour week.
October 11, 2011 6:20:45 AM

JSC I gotta saythat the non union stuff is no good, they are there to keep people from being treated unfairly, the toyota you speak of costs more han its US equivilant by a fair margin granted it is a better make, but those unions were put there to protect the workers from losing ground. Toyota has been profiting by leaps and bounds in comparison by on the backs of the hardworking american dreamers And as can be seen by the return of GMC and Chevy since these sad bailout times it was never the workers fault the company was not profitable its the designers of the pontiac asteck and Chevy Cavalier and the dodge everything that drove the company into the ground, and who pays for it aside from the tax payers the poor people who worked hard before the current workers to build up a respectable living for thise who followed them into these unions.

Blaming a union is really mssguided, they do not cause cars to be expensive and ill designed but it is really easy to put it on them.

PS I drive a toyota corola cause the NA competitors are well crap.
I don't feel it is the non union workers who caused this because the car is deffinately more expensive.

billions were thrown at poor management and design and yet the unions (the same people buiding the better products payed with 5-10 dollars and hour in lost wages it just seems wrong
October 11, 2011 12:48:57 PM

The main problem I have with unions is that they expressly give campaign donations to only the democrat party and democrat cadidates.

It's a huge money laundering slush fund, as was the "stimulus".

I want to hear more peoples' thoughts on just what the American dream is.

To me, it just means opportunity. Equal opportunity, but not equal outcome. The opportunity for my children and grandchildren to live a better life than myself. Isn't this why people come to the United States? A chance, just a chance, for a better life?
October 11, 2011 1:34:00 PM

When we talk about income, we don't take into account accumulated wealth in this country. Income is only the flow of money, while wealth can be compared to the big lakes of money that accumulates wherever there is an obstruction to the flow of money. In some ways, massive accumulations of wealth can become a hinderance to the effective workings of a capitalist economy. With this current recession, we are seeing exactly this problem.

Right now, with the cost of debt as low as it is, we should be seeing banks willingly giving out loans hand over fist to anyone who asks for it. Corporations should be taking out loans to grow their businesses. But banks are not willing to risk more defaults in an already-shaky economy, and are instead taking actions to increase their revenue stream on the backs of its customers. And corporations, rather than expending money to grow, are raising the prices of their goods and services to facilitate the accumulation of stockpiles of reserve cash because demand is low in this down economy.

So, right now, the more money you give to the wealthy (owners of banks and corporations) is going to end up accumulated rather than expended into the economy. Giving money to the wealthy at this point is only going to exacerbate the situation.

Instead, if you give money to the average consumer, it will be spent. It will either go to pay off debt or it will flow into the economy as consumer purchases. This could very well spur demand and cause companies to start spending cash to expand again. Paying off debt will ease the fears some banks have with lending money and they will once again start loaning money to the average person.

Voodoo economics works sometimes, but in our situation, it won't work, since the pressures that are limiting growth right now are not rational. This is one situation where we must, quite honestly, spend our way out of this recession to spur job growth. And the spending needs to start from the bottom, not the top.
October 11, 2011 2:19:43 PM

Houndsteeth said:
And the spending needs to start from the bottom, not the top.


Where do you suppose the bottom get the money to spend? From the Top? From a handout?

The corporations are going to get what they fear, a very depressed economy. The problem is when you tighten up your wallet everything else gets tighter and so on, till you cause what you fear.


"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
-Princess Leia-
October 11, 2011 2:40:21 PM

gokanis said:
Where do you suppose the bottom get the money to spend? From the Top? From a handout?

The corporations are going to get what they fear, a very depressed economy. The problem is when you tighten up your wallet everything else gets tighter and so on, till you cause what you fear.


"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
-Princess Leia-

i think he is saying the money would come from the government. instead of that stupid stimulus give the money to us. i think the number was about 2000$ per person and he is right it would be spent.
October 11, 2011 7:26:19 PM

Where did the government get the money to spend on the corporate bailouts? If you go back and study the fundamentals of Keynesian economic theory, in order to lessen the wide swings of recession and progression of the economy, the government is supposed to use spending and taxing policies to spend more during recessions and lower taxes, and during progressions, they are supposed to reduce spending and increase taxes. This way, we do not see the wild vicissitudes that our economy experienced before we started following the Keynesian model are much.

The problem with our government is that once budget is built, it becomes very difficult to cut spending year by year, since the nature of a bureaucracy is to fulfill needs on an ongoing basis, which leads to ever-increasing budgets as the scope of these services creeps into ever larger roles. So we see governemnt growing ever larger, with larger and larger deficits from year to year.

On the other side of the fence, raising taxes in today's political environment is tantamount to suicide for any politician's career. So instead of increasing the tax burden to offset the deficits from lean years, we just keep building up larger deficits until we end up with a huge national debt that is impossible to pay.

The pickle we are in was built over the last 4 decades, and has only been exacerbated over the last 20 years. Under the Clinton administration (and the Republican-controlled congress) we had a chance at actually making headway in fighting this problem. But then GW stepped in, and the Democrat-led congress was more than happy to let him run up the bill. Add to that two wars that were never really on the books, and then follow up with the Obama administration with two rounds of bailouts to American corporate interests, we see that this debt has just been piling up.

Well, our pigeons came home to roost. Now, not only is our economy stagnant, but we have nearly exhausted our means of getting it moving again. Instead, any money that gets into the system ends up floating into a wealth accumulation pool without going back into the economy for reinvestment.

Who is to blame for all this? We could blame either the Republicans or Democrats, but I would say a lot of the blame is on both of them. But the majority of the blame is on you and I, the average American citizen. We continue to elect people into office who only look out for their own interests, whether it be their party's interests, or their own electability for the next term. What we need are a few less politicians and a few more statesmen who are willing to make hard decisions and compromise to get legislation through to fix the problems. Sure, we can have Republicans who fight any new taxes tooth and nail, or we can have Democrats who view any budget cuts as an affront to civilization, but in order to get where we need to go, we need to both cut budgets and increase taxes. But before we can do this, we need to jumpstart the economy yet one more time, and we can't do this by paying the wealthy even more money just to let it sit. We need to send money where it will be spent. Public projects that improve public infrastructure is just one way to stimulate the economy. Tax rebates are another way. Hell, sending out checks to any and every taxpayer (i.e., you sent in a tax return last year, you get a check) will do a lot more to stimulate the economy than sending money to corporate America.
!