http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/year-end-tax-cuts-have-nearly-doubled-projected-size-of-national-debt-cbo-says/2013/09/17/cda802d2-1f9c-11e3-94a2-6c66b668ea55_story.html
I seem to remember that this was one of the arguments against making the
Bush tax cuts permanent. Nice to see
I think it says "we can't sustain the current fed spending without raising
taxes". In other words, cut spending.
.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/year-end-tax-cuts-have-nearly-doubled-project
6.2 percent is way too high. They should pay taxes until they break even.
That'll spark growth.
.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Casey Dougall wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Sam wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They actually paid 40%
>>>
>>> Nice bevnap math though.
>
First of all we're talking about 2009 where net earning were 19.2b not 31.4
Second, 80% of their earnings came from overseas where they paid most
of the their income taxes.
After tax profit was 6.2%
So:
19.2 b * .2 = 3,856,000,000
500,000,000 / 3,856,000,000 = .129688 = 12.9%
.
On Wed, Apr 20
It was his plan all along.
You know, if I made enough money that I had to pay a million in taxes, I
wouldn't complain much. Then again, the people that make that kind of
money are the ones who do and try to find ways around it.
> Ok, so think I read we need about 1,300,000,000,000 to balance
Casey Dougall wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>>
>> They actually paid 40%
>>
>> Nice bevnap math though.
>>
>>
> 500,000,000 / 31,400,000,000 * 100 = 1.592356687898089
>
Ok, so think I read we need about 1,300,000,000,000 to balance the
budget. If Exxon paid their fai
Gruss...1.6% is actually 502,400,000.00...so it is less than 1.6% ;-) comes
somewhere between 1.5 and 1.6...
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 05:44 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> They actually paid 40%
>
> Nice bevnap math though.
>
>
500,000,000 / 31,400,000,000 * 100 = 1.592356687898089
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
> >
> > Sam wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually, Exxon claims the paid $500 million but
They actually paid 40%
Nice bevnap math though.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Sam wrote:
>>
>> Actually, Exxon claims the paid $500 million but Sanders doesn't believe
>> them.
>
> Well, let's use that number $500,000,000
>
> Given that EM's 2010 net income was $31,4
It's not an extra tax...it's a tax paid on income.
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 05:08 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
And so do all the
I only get money from the business if it shows a profit. Usually the
profit runs 1% - 2% percent, and I get 8% of that. So if the company
makes 100 bucks profit, I get 8 dollars. We haven't had a profit
since 2006, but we were able to keep the stores open and not have to
fire our employees or
And so do all the people who aren't paying the inheritance tax.
Something about equal treatment under the law. If I have to pay a
extra tax, I want an extra representative.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> You have a representative in Congress right?
When the family owned farm is several thousand acres of Metro Atlanta, it's 40%
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> The government wouldn't be taking 40%. The inheritance and estate taxes
> only effected people with a lot of money...not you and me or even the family
> owned
Sam wrote:
>
> Actually, Exxon claims the paid $500 million but Sanders doesn't believe them.
Well, let's use that number $500,000,000
Given that EM's 2010 net income was $31,400,000,000
That would make their tax rate about %1.6?
Not too shabby! I want the ExxonMobile tax rate.
tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
That's what we were told it was for. We were lied to. Surprise.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> I think a better use of the stimulus would have been to pay off the
> mortgages. It would have
Cash for clunkers was stupid and useless. It was welfare to hold
companies over until the government put
the competition out of business.
Lucky for you you backed the right horse with your campaign donations.
Glad to see your wealthy again.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
He wouldn't have enough money to pay down the debt even if he didn't
give what he had to charity.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> Neither do the poor or middle class. But yes...Warren buffet alone could
> pay down the debt if he wanted to
~~~
Actually, Exxon claims the paid $500 million but Sanders doesn't believe them.
Also, the refund you speak of was for overpayment the previous year.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> To his credit, Sanders did make that distinction in a June 9, 2010, speech,
> saying tha
That's what we were told it was for. We were lied to. Surprise.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> I think a better use of the stimulus would have been to pay off the
> mortgages. It would have prevented this foreclosure fiasco we are
> experiencing...banks would have got
Hence the name INCOME ;-)
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 09:04 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
Maureen wrote:
>
> stock, not just the super w
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
>
> Of all the loopholes and special exemptions, I think that a true
> homestead exemption for inheritance is warranted, and about the only
> one I support.
I agree with a homestead exemption and I'd add in the ability to pass
a business
Of all the loopholes and special exemptions, I think that a true
homestead exemption for inheritance is warranted, and about the only
one I support.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
> We tax incoming money no matter the source: parents, lottery, job, et
Maureen wrote:
>
> stock, not just the super wealthy. Inheritance tax seems like double
> taxation to me. Since the parent paid taxes when they earned the
> money, why should the child have to pay tax on it again?
>
Because we have an income tax so if the funds are incoming to you,
then you pa
They did a study in Germany that showed if the top 2% of Germans paid
3% of their assets Germany would pull out of their financial crisis.
A few germans protested to draw attention to this fact...of course the
top 2% told them to f*** right off lol :-)
~~~
They won't be paying on the land they inherit...not unless it is worth
millions
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:12 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget
You have a representative in Congress right?
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:12 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
My many times great-grandfather
t: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:48 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
If it's my money, I should be able to do what I want with it. The
government telling me what I can do with it isn't democracy, it's socialism.
The
A monetary gift is still income.
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:56 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
No, to the child it is a gift from smart parents
My many times great-grandfather fought in the Revolutionary War - a
war against taxation without representation. The Continental Congress
awarded him a land grant in lieu of payment for his service. That
land is still in the family, handed down through many generations.
Tell me why my kids shoul
Democracy is a way of voting on policies. Socialism is a economic
policy. If people vote for a socialist economic policy in a democratic
voting system there is no conflict.
All taxation is socialist. It is fundamentally a redistribution of
what you think is "your" money for things which you may o
If it's my money, I should be able to do what I want with it. The
government telling me what I can do with it isn't democracy, it's
socialism. The government taking 40% of it in some cooked up scheme
to deingrate the rich is theft, pure and simple.
And there is that word entitlement again. Is
PM, Eric Roberts
> wrote:
>>
>> Because to the Child it is income.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 08:35 PM
>> To: cf-community
>> Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for
com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 08:35 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
> budget cuts
>
>
> I'm not a fan of increases in capital gains or inheritance taxes.
> Remember than increases in capital gains aff
Because to the Child it is income.
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 08:35 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
I'm not a fan of increases in capital gai
] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> So, out of the $3 trillion collected how much did your target audience
> pay in and how much extra do you think we'll gain?
>
> Hint top 10% pay 68%
>
> Also,
I agree with most of this. The cash for clunkers program saved our
family business. Forty-one stores and over 10 thousand jobs. It
looks like this year we might actually show a profit for the first
time since 2006.
Putting some of the stimulus into a loan restructuring program for
mortgages wo
Neither do the poor or middle class. But yes...Warren buffet alone could
pay down the debt if he wanted to.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 03:27 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds
al Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 03:12 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Eric Roberts wrote:
>>
>> They
I'm not a fan of increases in capital gains or inheritance taxes.
Remember than increases in capital gains affect everyone who owns
stock, not just the super wealthy. Inheritance tax seems like double
taxation to me. Since the parent paid taxes when they earned the
money, why should the child ha
more money and increasing demand further...
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 03:09 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
G Money wrote:
> So remove or limit
Pretty much...our elected officials pay more attention to them than they do
to us.
-Original Message-
From: Jerry Milo Johnson [mailto:jmi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 03:07 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget
t: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
S..if everyone knows about this, and knows that it suckswhy
don't we do something about it??
There MUST be another side to thiswhat is it?
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Casey Do
: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 02:58 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:55 PM, G Money wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Eric Roberts <
> ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 02:55 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Eric Roberts <
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> They actually pay a lower rate of taxes after
He spent 14 trillion over the next decade? Did I fall asleep and it's 2021?
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 02:53 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue
You guys are doing sound bytes. The reality is finding hidden dollars
aren't the answer. They might help a wee bit but we have real problems
that won't get solved. Remember how fast Bono booked when they decided
to charge him taxes.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Rober
You can go door to door and get the taxes at gunpoint but that still
won't be enough to support Obama's spending. And don't forget, for
every dollar they find from some rich bastard they will spend three.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Sam wrote:
>>
>> So, out of the
Robert Munn wrote:
>
> They may still pay some taxes, but in general they will pay capital
> gains (15% flat) rather than income (35% top bracket) taxes, so they
> come out WAY ahead.
>
Yeah, if basically everything you used or did was an asset or expense
of a company (just breaking even) then .
We keep throwing money at education and it gets worse. Maybe cuts will help.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Casey Dougall
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>>
>> I didn't say it wasn't fair, I said it won't solve anything.
They may still pay some taxes, but in general they will pay capital
gains (15% flat) rather than income (35% top bracket) taxes, so they
come out WAY ahead.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> People who don't work for a living can (if they're smart) manipulate
> their assets
Sam wrote:
>
> So, out of the $3 trillion collected how much did your target audience
> pay in and how much extra do you think we'll gain?
>
> Hint top 10% pay 68%
>
You pay more income tax than Bill Gates and Warren Buffet combined.
You're rich!!
See the problem is that people who work for a
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I didn't say it wasn't fair, I said it won't solve anything.
>
> .
>
OK so cutting spending from Education every cycle is helping?
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
h
I didn't say it wasn't fair, I said it won't solve anything.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Casey Dougall
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>>
>> So, out of the $3 trillion collected how much did your target audience
>> pay in and how much extra do you think we'll g
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> So, out of the $3 trillion collected how much did your target audience
> pay in and how much extra do you think we'll gain?
>
> Hint top 10% pay 68%
>
> Also, do you think removing tax incentives will help repair the economy?
>
>
If it's not fair t
So, out of the $3 trillion collected how much did your target audience
pay in and how much extra do you think we'll gain?
Hint top 10% pay 68%
Also, do you think removing tax incentives will help repair the economy?
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Mmmm I'm thinking th
Sam wrote:
>
> The rich don't have enough to pay down the debt
>
Mmmm I'm thinking the wealthy + wealthy corporations would.
Judah can probably get us the accurate numbers but I'll just noodle it
out here as is my custom ...
So Q42010 was "the most profitable" in history for corporations with
I thought it would be hard to stand against a site you swear by.
BTW, they paid $500 million in income tax.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Sam wrote:
>> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/dec/10/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-filibuster-exxon-mobil/
>>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
> Getting rid of the loopholes alone would allow a top rate tax CUT from
> 35% to 30% and would still easily pay down the debt if we included
> modest spending cuts.
The rich don't have enough to pay down the debt
> Of course that's not going
Sam wrote:
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/dec/10/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-filibuster-exxon-mobil/
>
Oh sure, you read a left-leaning site and then obediently follow what it says.
(psst - btw, they pay $0 in *income* tax which is less than you)
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Eric Roberts wrote:
>>
>> They actually pay a lower rate of taxes after all the loopholes, rebates,
>> and tax shelters they can take advantage of that most people in the middle
>> and lower classes don't have availableso no, the actual
G Money wrote:
>
> S..if everyone knows about this, and knows that it suckswhy
> don't we do something about it??
>
> There MUST be another side to thiswhat is it?
>
Lobbyists!!
You really think congressmen and women get by on their government check?
~~~
G Money wrote:
> So remove or limit the loopholes, rebates and shelters that are available
> only to the super rich (whatever those are). Do you have an specifics?
>
Our situation is actually that easy to fix.
Getting rid of the loopholes alone would allow a top rate tax CUT from
35% to 30% and
The people who own the lobbyists and legislators don't want it changed?
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:05 PM, G Money wrote:
>
> S..if everyone knows about this, and knows that it suckswhy
> don't we do something about it??
>
> There MUST be another side to thiswhat is it?
~~
S..if everyone knows about this, and knows that it suckswhy
don't we do something about it??
There MUST be another side to thiswhat is it?
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Casey Dougall <
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:55 PM, G Money wr
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:55 PM, G Money wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Eric Roberts <
> ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > They actually pay a lower rate of taxes after all the loopholes, rebates,
> > and tax shelters they can take advantage of that most people in th
Eric Roberts wrote:
>
> They actually pay a lower rate of taxes after all the loopholes, rebates,
> and tax shelters they can take advantage of that most people in the middle
> and lower classes don't have availableso no, the actual rate is lower
> than ours.
If we're talking about *income*
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Eric Roberts <
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> They actually pay a lower rate of taxes after all the loopholes, rebates,
> and tax shelters they can take advantage of that most people in the middle
> and lower classes don't have availableso no, the
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> No, Bush is not off the hook since he was most of the reason we are in this
> mess to begin with. If it hadn't been for his irresponsible tax cuts and
> getting us illegally involved in a war in Iraq, then we probably
gm0n3...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 02:38 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Eric Roberts <
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
> They pay les compared to the amount of in
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Eric Roberts <
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
> They pay les compared to the amount of income they make
what exactly does this mean, Eric?
> In fact, their tax rate is lowest it has been in the country's history.
>
But their RATE is STILL higher than
No, Bush is not off the hook since he was most of the reason we are in this
mess to begin with. If it hadn't been for his irresponsible tax cuts and
getting us illegally involved in a war in Iraq, then we probably wouldn't be
in this mess...or at a minimum, it would be as bad as it
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> Hasn't most, if not all of the TARP been repaid?
Good point. That means Bush is off the hook for that mess. It even
brought in a profit unlike the stimulus.
> If we are going to be
> making cuts (and thus increasing the burden on the bott
Hybrids and Electric cars are useless.
I imagine they would have a bus going to your house if people used it.
Empty buses just add to traffic.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> I agree...I think we need more public transportation. I would love to dump
> my car, but un
in to
republican demands like the republicans are the majority.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:35 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
We don't need to cu
obert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:22 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
Obama or no Obama, we're in deep and we can't just cut spending and dig our
way out. We are in a situation where, unde
We don't need to cut spending until we're starving. We just need to
cut all the spending from the last two years. Repeal Obama care and
then we need t work on repaying the tarp and stimulus money. Then
there's the entitlements.
At this rate we can't survive, if we reverse all the damage we will
r
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> terrorism...if he was, 9/11 wouldn't have happened in the first place. Kind
> of hard to miss "Bin Laden Planning Attack in America", yet he managed to
> mistake that for something else when presented with it in a meeting.
Are you talking
Do you have a statue of Michael Moore in your yard?
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> Actually...no I haven't. Most progressives are not happy with Obama
> either...he is far too republican for our tastes.
>
> Eric
~~~
Obama or no Obama, we're in deep and we can't just cut spending and
dig our way out. We are in a situation where, under the current
system, we either:
1. keep going forward with the current plan, ultimately resulting in
the debasement of the dollar, leading to $15/gallon oil, or
2. dramatically c
t to have money left over.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:00
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
Why would I be the one bamboozled. I'm the one saying we're tak
Actually...no I haven't. Most progressives are not happy with Obama
either...he is far too republican for our tastes.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:00
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: [politics] Cost of tax cuts fo
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Judah McAuley wrote:
> I'm sure the Soviets said the same thing, many times.
>
> That's the tough thing. I believe that the system is more resilient
> than many believe. There have always been Cassandra's prophesying
> doom. On the other hang, things really do fa
Why would I be the one bamboozled. I'm the one saying we're taking the
wrong course and you're the one saying Obama knows best.
Two more years of this and we are done. I keep hoping one day Obama
will wake up and say not only was Bush right about terrorism, he was
right about the economy too.
I k
tax cuts for the rich exceeds gains by
budget cuts
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:23 AM, G Money wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a good nose for trouble, and my nose is telling me trouble is
>> coming fast.
>>
>
> Bl
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:23 AM, G Money wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a good nose for trouble, and my nose is telling me trouble is
>> coming fast.
>>
>
> Blow yer nose, then take a dep breaththings may be tough, and may
> get tougher...b
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> I have a good nose for trouble, and my nose is telling me trouble is
> coming fast.
>
Blow yer nose, then take a dep breaththings may be tough, and may
get tougher...but the system will hold.
Flat wages aren't a bad thing unless you're living beyond your means.
We had two wars and an imaginary surplus. So tightening our belts was
acceptable, of course the false riches of the housing bubble changed
that.
>From that point on it became a wealth redistribution from the people
to the banker
I have a good nose for trouble, and my nose is telling me trouble is
coming fast.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:11 AM, G Money wrote:
>
> Some of ya'all just need to take a deep breath.
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology
Some of ya'all just need to take a deep breath.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> Corporate outsourcing from 2000-2010 kept wages flat for an entire
> decade, even as inflation ticked away every year, eroding the standard
> of living of the entire middle class. Obama
Corporate outsourcing from 2000-2010 kept wages flat for an entire
decade, even as inflation ticked away every year, eroding the standard
of living of the entire middle class. Obama responded with the tools
of an old-school liberal - huge deficits, monetized debt, tax
increases. A well-intentione
Let's do some analysis.
Is it at all Fixable? Practically fixable.
There are a lot of idealogical discussions, and if everything worked
well this would happen etc.
But practically, is there any way out of this?
~|
Order the Ad
You mean 2008 -2011
The new ruler has failed.
S&P has stated that as plain as can be.
Oh, and there was never a surplus.
.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
>
> The killer for the US was the 2000-2010 cycle where we went from
> surplus to insane levels of debt. And this is
Casey Dougall wrote:
> When Moody's Investors Service revised its outlook on Japan's AAA-rated
> sovereign debt to negative from stable in 1998 -- similar to what S&P did to
> the United States on Monday -- the yen sank to its lowest level in six years
> and government bond prices fell sharply.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> Republicans argue that the rich need a tax break in order to invest in
> the country, but they are already sitting on $2 trillion in capital,
> and their investments of late have tended toward commodities (gold,
> silver, oil) and foreign i
many US jobs.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> There was never a question of extending tax cuts for those with
> earnings under 250,000.
> The issue is in not taxing those at 250,000+ at the normal rate.
>
> So the idea was that you get the benefits of this 2
There was never a question of extending tax cuts for those with
earnings under 250,000.
The issue is in not taxing those at 250,000+ at the normal rate.
So the idea was that you get the benefits of this 2000 that you quote,
PLUS the increased taxes from the wealthy.
On 18 April 2011 15:46, Sam
uts to the budget.
But, what did happen makes more sense.
Am I close?
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/18/tax-cuts-rich_n_848933.html
>
> So hilarious. And the only excuse is that these are the people who are
> supposed to '
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/18/tax-cuts-rich_n_848933.html
So hilarious. And the only excuse is that these are the people who are
supposed to 'save' the country and provide jobs. A statement that
cannot be backed by any facts or projections.
When they push the tax breaks th
"The hard, empirical facts:
*The tax cuts did not spur investment.
*Job growth in the George W. Bush years was one-seventh that of the
Clinton years. Nixon and Ford did better than Bush on jobs.
*Wages fell during the last administration.
*Average incomes fell.
*The number of America
http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9?OpenDocument
" The 2008 income tax data are now in, so we can assess the
fulfillment of the Republican promise that tax cuts would produce
widespread prosperity by looking at all the years of the George W.
Bush presidency.
Just as
1 - 100 of 221 matches
Mail list logo
