TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- So the US government starts shutting down tomorrow...
Pages (9): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 »

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I do miss opus� rapings of kev. Now now, let�s not be silly. Smaller communities will almost always receive a disproportionate amount of taxation revenue. They�re not leeches, it�s just more cost effective to provide various services in regions that contain a lot of people. If your amendment was passed you would be withdrawing services from certain areas despite the fact that the citizens in these regions pay the same rates of tax as everyone else. I don�t see it as fundamentally different to taxing an income of $1M at a different rate than $50,000.

Alaska wasn't the best example for the reason you listed. But when other recipients like Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, etc. all offer cheap discounts to Honda, Toyota, etc. for moving their factories there because they can afford it as a result of the benefits, there's a problem.

Secondly, those numbers include Homeland Security expenses. When New York is at the low end of the recipient list, plus gets a ton of money for anti-terrorism money, don't you think they're getting fucked when it comes to real domestic projects?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Alaska wasn't the best example for the reason you listed. But when other recipients like Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, etc. all offer cheap discounts to Honda, Toyota, etc. for moving their factories there because they can afford it as a result of the benefits, there's a problem. Secondly, those numbers include Homeland Security expenses. When New York is at the low end of the recipient list, plus gets a ton of money for anti-terrorism money, don't you think they're getting fucked when it comes to real domestic projects?

as a resident of a state that gets about $1.50 per $1 paid in taxation, i�m not really sure what the alternatives are, and have no major issues with bigger, richer states subsidising the services of their poor, downtrodden buddies across the map. But you�re right, I can see how that may cause problems when sneaky jew states use this to attract corporate settlement. How would you go about fixing that do you think?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN as a resident of a state that gets about $1.50 per $1 paid in taxation, i�m not really sure what the alternatives are, and have no major issues with bigger, richer states subsidising the services of their poor, downtrodden buddies across the map. But you�re right, I can see how that may cause problems when sneaky jew states use this to attract corporate settlement. How would you go about fixing that do you think?

Michigan doesn't even break even and they're far from one of the wealthier states, so the rich/poor state analogy doesn't work. Here's a breakdown as of 2005, which is obviously outdated - http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html%29. Louisiana is going to be a lot higher now, as a result of Hurricane Katrina spending (a worthy expense due to the devastation).
I'd agree with your rich v. poor argument if it actually was reality. Secondly, the states that all make out like bandits all vote Republican, who don't believe what you advocate, that rich should pay higher than the poor.

I really love hearing people talk about how 50% of the public doesn't pay taxes, when you've got 10% unemployment nationwide, and many people just have part-time jobs that don't garner enough money to actually pay taxes. I have an uncle that's a township employee. He makes about $10K a year, at about minimum wage. Is he supposed to pay a lot of taxes? How about my parents' friends at home, one of which doesn't get a consistent 40 hours at K-Mart (after like 15+ years of working there) and her husband doesn't get the same at Wal-Mart? They've lived in the same trailer all my life, so it's obviously paid for (HELOC status unknown). Another uncle has been unemployed for 2 years because the manufacturing job he had in a casket factory moved offshore after a buyout (by a PE company like Romney ran). He wasn't even making $20/hour before.

You know how much some of these people use national resources as a proportion???? Do you think they're flying all over the US and getting their money out of the airports? Why should they be paying for them?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby So why do we have to cut social programs? Why did your party invent this crisis? We could run up another 14 trillion in debt and it wouldn't harm anyone because we are so tied up in this mess together, the whole world I mean. So, again, why did you invent this crisis?

So, uhhhh....

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss When is Obama going to be responsible for anything? His spending, his economic policies, his everything. He's 3 years in. When are you going to stop making excuses? When will he be responsible for the economy he presides over? WHEN.

You're a fucking imbecile Nou. Why do we have to cut social programs... are you kidding? My god, you are so simplistic. The Republicans invented the crisis? LMAO! Right, but the Democrats' exponentially higher borrowing and spending the past few years compared to the Republicans isn't an issue? How does it feel to know Sarah Palin made it further through school than you?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN 4 words: republican prescription drugs act.

I agree with you man. A travesty, I hated Bush for doing it, and those of us who care about fiscal sanity saw the eventual results coming. Yet, it still pales in comparison to Obama's spending commitments.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I do miss opus� rapings of kev.

Weak. Opus' tactic was to inundate those who disagree with a minimum of 10,000 words and 50+ links to follow up on, that it took a solid 4+ hours to type up a reply. I tried it a couple of times, going balls out with him and next thing I knew 2 days had passed and his rebuttals were getting even longer. Boring me to death to the point where I don't have the energy to spend literally all day reading and responding to one topic that's getting beat to death more than Nou's self worth does not a victory make.

Occrider, Arbiter, and you (props for PKC!) give some of the best "short and to the point" rebuttals on TA... no doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss So, uhhhh....

You ignored the part where I said the deficit doesn't matter.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You ignored the part where I said the deficit doesn't matter.

No, I didn't. It was just so much of a stupid statement, I couldn't even bring myself to comment on it. Excuse me if I'm going to listen to the owner of the world's largest and most successful Mutual Fund over you on that issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You ignored the part where I said the deficit doesn't matter.

That wasn't true when Cheney said it and it's not now. The factor that's important is what stage the economy is in. We have two parties that have opposite views, and neither is sustainable. We have the Republicans that don't care about the bottom line in good times, and the Democrats that don't care about it in bad times. I'd lean slightly Democratic on this one, but that's just because I've witnessed how things have worked for the past 30 years, not because I'm an ideologue.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy That wasn't true when Cheney said it and it's not now. The factor that's important is what stage the economy is in. We have two parties that have opposite views, and neither is sustainable. We have the Republicans that don't care about the bottom line in good times, and the Democrats that don't care about it in bad times.

Exactly. We're going to get downgraded anyway because of our debt problem, not because of the debt ceiling going up another $2.4 Trillion. Markets see our government's utter lack of ability to control itself. And once the interest rates jump, all those "savings" from the so-called compromise we just had will disappear.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss I agree with you man. A travesty, I hated Bush for doing it, and those of us who care about fiscal sanity saw the eventual results coming. Yet, it still pales in comparison to Obama's spending commitments.

Then why can't they repeal it?

And can you do us all a favor and explain where all the commitments came from. I can simplify, which is something that gets overlooked by short-sighted people:
"Wasted" Stimulus Plan - 40% was tax cuts, not spending
Bush Tax Cut extension - fought tooth & nail by Republicans.
Multiple wars - $1.6 trillion

Do me a favor & show the rest, excluding the legacy costs inherited by the Bush moves.

I would just like to add that my father worked in highway construction. We never were well-off (my parents made less combined than I did very quickly after I started working). Anyhow, my dad retired early and is taking a reduced pension now (so that my 12 year younger mother still gets paid when he dies). He wanted to continue working, but due to a lack of funds, there wasn't a job to be had.

P.S. I think this was a shitty move, as my dad will probably live longer...from an objective standpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Exactly. We're going to get downgraded anyway because of our debt problem, not because of the debt ceiling going up another $2.4 Trillion. Markets see our government's utter lack of ability to control itself. And once the interest rates jump, all those "savings" from the so-called compromise we just had will disappear.

I don't disagree with you about the downgrade. It's going to happen for some contracts & funds that have certain requisites, as S&P says we're still fucked. This should have been bigger, and originally was proposed to be. And cuts should have come from everywhere and taxes should have gone up, especially for certain people that have proven NOT to be job creators.

Kev,
Do you realistically believe that the highest bracket now should be 39.6% for $380,500+? Especially considering that few people that make that much get direct deposit from their job, as opposed to most of their income coming from investments?

At what point do you say that you're getting tons of benefits from lower cost airfare, which is subsidized by the federal government? Or other actions that benefit higher income people that utilize the international trade system more than most people have the chance to?

Don't get me wrong, I realize you push lots of your income through Singapore and other out-of-country areas (as you've stated in PDD before), but explain how that is a viable motive "for your children," when that reference is to the entire population's vs. your own.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I don't disagree with you about the downgrade. It's going to happen for some contracts & funds that have certain requisites, as S&P says we're still fucked. This should have been bigger, and originally was proposed to be. And cuts should have come from everywhere and taxes should have gone up, especially for certain people that have proven NOT to be job creators.

Like GE... which I find an interesting case since their CEO is on Obama's "jobs panel", and with a $15 billion profit last year paid zero taxes; in fact they got money back! The guy tasked to help consult on job growth.... this is rich... since taking over GE in 2001 has shed 36,000 domestic jobs, and so far 25,000 have re-appeared overseas. And that doesn't count their announcement last week to move their new CT Scan imaging operation to China.

As for your other request, I'll start you off with this Politifact analysis detailing how Romney was "mostly true" in his assertion that Obama has spent more money than all 43 previous presidents combined. The reason it's "mostly true" and not "100% true"? Obama's term hasn't finished yet.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...dd-more-debt-4/


I'll get you specifically what you asked for later... too tired now. But I must reiterate again: cutting taxes is not government spending; that's Washington bullshit-speak, and to believe that is to assume all money belongs to government first, before it's allocated.

No, the deficit doesn't matter. The only time it matters is if we can not pay it. Otherwise there is NO way that ratings agencies will downgrade us just for the hell of it. If we are making payments then we are golden.

That is how the system works. You think they'd throw a monkey wrench into the system by downgrading the US when it is paying on time? No fucking way. They threaten downgrade when countries have no way to pay, or look like they will have no way to pay in the near future, like Greece.

The US is not in any position where we are going to be denied loans. If we keep making good on our interest payments then no one is going to touch us, because they cant do it with out fucking over themselves. The whole system is like Jenga, we keep building the tower taller and taller, and as long as everything remains steady then it can keep going higher and higher.

Either the republicans are too stupid to realize that they can game the system like this, or their own idealogical pigheadedness is such that they are willing to fuck over EVERYONE to make a point.

If I am wrong, explain to me how any good could come from an arbitrary reduction in our credit rating and why it hasn't been done yet?

Also, you guys keep talking about reductions in credit ratings like it is the natural law. There is no natural law in economies of this scale or complexity, everything comes down to biased decisions of people. It is not a inherent law of physics or other universal constant, it is essentially a game created by men.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Kev, Do you realistically believe that the highest bracket now should be 39.6% for $380,500+? Especially considering that few people that make that much get direct deposit from their job, as opposed to most of their income coming from investments? At what point do you say that you're getting tons of benefits from lower cost airfare, which is subsidized by the federal government? Or other actions that benefit higher income people that utilize the international trade system more than most people have the chance to? Don't get me wrong, I realize you push lots of your income through Singapore and other out-of-country areas (as you've stated in PDD before), but explain how that is a viable motive "for your children," when that reference is to the entire population's vs. your own.

Since late 2009 all income we've made both here and abroad has been wired to the US and taxed accordingly. We haven't been slipping through loopholes lately. That may change next year as we're forming a new joint venture that will probably be headquartered overseas, but we'll see. As of late, I've been doing my patriotic duty

To your original question... tough to answer because it depends on where you live. If you live in NYC, between federal, state, local, and city taxes you're giving up almost 70% of your income with a salary like that. To me that's fucked up, but NY is a bigtime welfare state and will pay the price for this soon since the high earners are leaving in droves for FL, TX and NH. In certain states where there is no State income tax, I think that 39% rate (or higher) is more justifiable for sure, yes. In my opinion though, I think a bigger problem is that a growing number of people aren't paying at all... we need tax payers man, and more of them. I've heard enough sob stories to last a lifetime- but even the people who make 20K, 15K, whatever... they should also be taxed on their income (albeit at a lower rate). They should pay SOMETHING. And what a difference it would make.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Weak. Opus' tactic was to inundate those who disagree with a minimum of 10,000 words and 50+ links to follow up on, that it took a solid 4+ hours to type up a reply. I tried it a couple of times, going balls out with him and next thing I knew 2 days had passed and his rebuttals were getting even longer. Boring me to death to the point where I don't have the energy to spend literally all day reading and responding to one topic that's getting beat to death more than Nou's self worth does not a victory make.

You�re not the only rape victim to complain about the length or girth let me tell you.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby No, the deficit doesn't matter. The only time it matters is if we can not pay it. Otherwise there is NO way that ratings agencies will downgrade us just for the hell of it. If we are making payments then we are golden.

Agencies that have already downgraded the US:

1) Egan-Jones Ratings Co.
2) Weiss
3) Dagong Global Credit Rating (China)


So, again you look like a fool. Just stop.


EDIT: If you're wondering about Moody's:

quote:

Moody's: Neither debt plan protects the nation's AAA rating http://mobile.thehill.com//blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/174447-moodys-neither-plan-protects-the-nations-aaa-rating

Why is this? Because, as Moody's explains, even if we can service our debt right now, our leaders are not showing any serious effort to reform the larger issue of our god damn debt as a whole.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Agencies that have already downgraded the US: 1) Egan-Jones Ratings Co. 2) Weiss 3) Dagong Global Credit Rating (China) So, again you look like a fool. Just stop. EDIT: If you're wondering about Moody's: Why is this? Because, as Moody's explains, even if we can service our debt right now, our leaders are not showing any serious effort to reform the larger issue of our god damn debt as a whole.

No, the real reason is because we demonstrated that we have a group of fucking wackos who wont pay their debt.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Since late 2009 all income we've made both here and abroad has been wired to the US and taxed accordingly. We haven't been slipping through loopholes lately. That may change next year as we're forming a new joint venture that will probably be headquartered overseas, but we'll see. As of late, I've been doing my patriotic duty To your original question... tough to answer because it depends on where you live. If you live in NYC, between federal, state, local, and city taxes you're giving up almost 70% of your income with a salary like that. To me that's fucked up, but NY is a bigtime welfare state and will pay the price for this soon since the high earners are leaving in droves for FL, TX and NH. In certain states where there is no State income tax, I think that 39% rate (or higher) is more justifiable for sure, yes. In my opinion though, I think a bigger problem is that a growing number of people aren't paying at all... we need tax payers man, and more of them. I've heard enough sob stories to last a lifetime- but even the people who make 20K, 15K, whatever... they should also be taxed on their income (albeit at a lower rate). They should pay SOMETHING. And what a difference it would make.

I'm actually not enthralled about this concept of reforming Social Security so that people that paid in money and got wealthy don't get any payout. That is a program that is supposed to be based on input. As a recent example applied to the U.S. model, Amy Winehouse would have plowed a ton of money into the system, yet gotten nothing. And if no one has noticed, that's the way this system works.

I'm glad to hear about the original comment, which I did remember and exemplifies the average man getting screwed previously.

I hate to tell you, but I break $100K, and I pay less than 50% between all of my income taxes, not the level you mentioned. And there should be a difference between someone that makes what I make and someone that makes $500K, $1M, $5M, etc.

As pointed out earlier, there's a reason for the extra state and NYC taxes, and that's because we get fucked by the federal government expenditures for what we pay in. And seriously, when tons of that money is a waste considering they're Homeland Security costs, we're really getting fucked.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Agencies that have already downgraded the US: 1) Egan-Jones Ratings Co. 2) Weiss 3) Dagong Global Credit Rating (China) So, again you look like a fool. Just stop. EDIT: If you're wondering about Moody's: Why is this? Because, as Moody's explains, even if we can service our debt right now, our leaders are not showing any serious effort to reform the larger issue of our god damn debt as a whole.

I'm not going to speak for him, but I think he's referring to S&P (or at least he should be). They've already said that the cuts aren't enough. Any contracts or prospectuses that involve the S&P could still get slammed. You, of few people on this board, should realize how a downgrade affects the holdings of tons of mutual funds, ETFs, and sovereign wealth funds.

bond yeilds have already dropped significantly following the announcement, i honestly doubt any of the big credit rating agencies will end up downgrading US bonds anytime soon.

Remember, these are the same agencies that gave such high ratings to the sub prime mortgages, i honestly doubt they would end up rating national debt any lower.


There is also no comparison of Greece to the US.

Greek bond coupons are in at around 8.75 % par value for the 10 year. Conversely US bonds are sitting in at around 2.8% par value.

If you want to buy a Greek bond right now you can get it at a hefty discount of almost 50% of face value accounting for a yield of 14+% whereas you'd have to pay a premium for a US bond now.


Apples and oranges.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Michigan doesn't even break even and they're far from one of the wealthier states, so the rich/poor state analogy doesn't work. Here's a breakdown as of 2005, which is obviously outdated - http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html%29. Louisiana is going to be a lot higher now, as a result of Hurricane Katrina spending (a worthy expense due to the devastation). I'd agree with your rich v. poor argument if it actually was reality. Secondly, the states that all make out like bandits all vote Republican, who don't believe what you advocate, that rich should pay higher than the poor. I really love hearing people talk about how 50% of the public doesn't pay taxes, when you've got 10% unemployment nationwide, and many people just have part-time jobs that don't garner enough money to actually pay taxes. I have an uncle that's a township employee. He makes about $10K a year, at about minimum wage. Is he supposed to pay a lot of taxes? How about my parents' friends at home, one of which doesn't get a consistent 40 hours at K-Mart (after like 15+ years of working there) and her husband doesn't get the same at Wal-Mart? They've lived in the same trailer all my life, so it's obviously paid for (HELOC status unknown). Another uncle has been unemployed for 2 years because the manufacturing job he had in a casket factory moved offshore after a buyout (by a PE company like Romney ran). He wasn't even making $20/hour before. You know how much some of these people use national resources as a proportion???? Do you think they're flying all over the US and getting their money out of the airports? Why should they be paying for them?

Don't forget that insurance companies are allowed to consider credit scores when determining premium rates, in Michigan. In many areas, from banking to cell-phone coverage, it can actually cost more to pay for the lowest tier of service than comparable plans secured by people with better financial outlooks. It's not as though poor people are getting off scot-free.

There are "courtesy loan" charges, levied by banks who do things post misleading information on internet statements regarding account balances, so that people will over-draft their accounts believing they have enough money in the account to cover the expenses they're incurring. The over-draft fee has, in itself, helped to establish the "Hail Mary" of default control for poor people - pay day lending - where people can acquire a payday loan at 400%+/- APR interest.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I'm glad to hear about the original comment, which I did remember and exemplifies the average man getting screwed previously. I hate to tell you, but I break $100K, and I pay less than 50% between all of my income taxes, not the level you mentioned. And there should be a difference between someone that makes what I make and someone that makes $500K, $1M, $5M, etc. As pointed out earlier, there's a reason for the extra state and NYC taxes, and that's because we get fucked by the federal government expenditures for what we pay in. And seriously, when tons of that money is a waste considering they're Homeland Security costs, we're really getting fucked.

The "average man" isn't getting as screwed as people make them out to be, considering almost half don't pay income taxes.

Where do you live now... did you move to NJ or are you in NYC? I can't remember.

One thing I will say too- I'm fine with the idea that if you make a salary over some arbitrarily high number, during those years in which your income was high you shouldn't get SS checks following retirement. If you have a successful career, I think it's your responsibility to structure your post-work future accordingly and not rely on handouts that could either: A) go to more deserving people if the money is going to be there anyway, or B) be used to pay down the SS debt/future commitments. A financially sound person has no reason to rely on SS checks at the end of their life.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss A financially sound person has no reason to rely on SS checks at the end of their life.

You are such a fucking moron. God damn.

You realize that sounds fine and dandy on paper, but not everyone can be financially sound. Everyone can be financially responsible, but sadly that doesn't mean they are sound.

God damn. You are more spoiled than I am. That or you are so fucking tunnel visioned in your own success that you assume everyone is capable or has the opportunities you do.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You are such a fucking moron. God damn. You realize that sounds fine and dandy on paper, but not everyone can be financially sound. Everyone can be financially responsible, but sadly that doesn't mean they are sound. God damn. You are more spoiled than I am. That or you are so fucking tunnel visioned in your own success that you assume everyone is capable or has the opportunities you do.

Jesus, Nou! Are you actually being intentionally obdurate to the rest of the text you excised that from?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.