This topic contains 123 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Laptops Daddy 3 years, 10 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #57912

    Rommel
    Participant

    .

    #57913

    Rommel
    Participant

    .

    #57914

    Deathbal
    Participant

    Hello, Rommel, always a pleasure to talk to you. I only have a couple of comments.

    As you know, we spend more money now that ever before. We have a mammoth debt and roughly 1 trillion dollar deficit. It just seems to me that the more socialist the US becomes, the more people try to blame capitalism. And if you think Bernie Sanders is concerned with the debt passed on to our grand children, then the joke is on you. It’s nothing more than the usual talking points for elections. He must want to run for President.

    As a socialist Sanders will focus on massive entitlements paid for by someone else, all the while blaming greedy capitalists. This of course will cost much more than anticipated and add to the deficit and surmounting debt. The complete opposite of not mortgaging out our grand children’s future. And for those of you that want to blame evil companies, here is a link of the top ten employers that pay their workforce the least.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ten-companies-paying-americans-least-112523979.html

    Look at Revenue vs Net Income. The difference is enormous and is the primary reason companies that can leave the country, do. There isn’t much room to take more.

    #57915

    Rommel
    Participant

    .

    #57916

    Rommel
    Participant

    .

    #57917

    Deathbal
    Participant

    Oh my God! #-o . Rommel, I will get back to you.

    #57918

    Deathbal
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    We also have many more people than we did at the end of the
    70’s. I use that time period because the record reflects an abrupt
    change in our spending to income ratio occurred about that time.

    About the same time that Reagan and Bush took control and also
    about the same time that the burden began to shift away from
    those able to bear the load, onto those barely making ends meet.

    The 70’s and early 80’s were also the hay day of deregulation.
    This lead to the Savings and Loan industry collapse around 1987.
    ( see : John Glen Savings and Loan Keating Five McCain )

    I am not going to say everything Reagan/Bush did was good, but under Carter our top tax rate was 70%. Our economy was in shambles. Why wouldn’t it be? What idiot would risk investment with such a small return? But my father would agree with you on the deregulation part. 😀

    @rommel wrote:

    We now have, according to a Bear Sterns estimate, about 20 MILLION
    illegals. Many survive on substandard wages by pooling their money
    and renting gheto style apartments. In my area, it is not uncommon for
    ten or more to be living in an apartment intended for no more than two.

    I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Obviously it isn’t going to be easy for anyone in this country that’s here illegally. Nor do I believe we should be supporting another county’s poor.

    @rommel wrote:

    It looks like McDonald’s is doing pretty well to me.

    From the page you linked, they reported annual

    Revenues of $ 27.6 BILLION and a
    Net Income of $ 5.5 BILLION

    This is a profit of about 20% of Revenues. Not bad considering that
    this was after paying the CEO a whopping $ 13.8 MILLION and no
    telling how many more millions went out to their other executives.

    The one thing you left out was their over 700k employees. Pay them each 5 bucks more an hour and you will see that net income evaporate quickly. Now you mentioned the CEO being paid 13 mil. Compared to the revenue and profits that is a wart on the jolly green giants toe. His salary is nothing more than a talking point to make people angry. It really has no impact on anyone’s pay. And as far as advertising goes, what do you suggest? Obviously they believe the return is worth the cost. Should we tell them they can’t do this? And did you ever stop to think the business tax may be too high? Or does that not count?

    @rommel wrote:

    Opps. we’re in the wrong thread … About the war …

    Did you find fault with any of the things Mr. Sanders mentioned as his
    reasons for being very concerned about us starting a war with Syria ?

    Is his honestly self-proclaimed title as a Socalist a problem for you ?

    I have no problem with his opinion on war. I do have a problem with his self proclaimed title however. I am for equal opportunity for the citizens of the US, not equal outcomes. I have a major problem when the government wants to subsidize some people with other people’s money. I have a real problem when people talk about wage disparity and their solution is to weaken the top. That solves nothing. That is no different than salary caps in sports. Some teams suck, so lets make it harder for good teams to remain at the top.

    People should be looking for ways to bring the bottom up, not the top down. But misery loves company I guess.

    #57919

    BOY
    Participant

    McDonald’s Billion-Dollar Profit Is Awkwardly Close To The Amount It Costs Taxpayers Every Year
    The Huffington Post
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/mcdonalds-profit-taxpayers_n_4136336.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

    The main question that arises is whether or not you believe a public company owes the public something that a private one doesn’t. Or is the bottom line for the shareholders the only important thing? Is there any morality in a “for profit only” economy? Is there a fundamental difference between a corporate CEO’s bonus check of 13 million and a landscaping businessman’s annual net income? Is raising the minimum wage fair to both of them?

    #57920

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Deathbal :

    Before you reply, I have to know … Have you seen Willis ?

    On the war :

    We agree on Mr. Sanders war stance but feel differently about
    his title. No problem. If we forget the title and look at some of
    his other policy statements, it seems likely that we may find
    others, where the three of us agree. That is a good start.

    If we were to find more places where we agree with him,
    than with the non-socialists, and these were topics of
    high importance, then the title Socialist and the type of
    Socialism he favors might be something we’d approve.

    I know that thought is bothersome to you, but if you’ll
    think about what I just wrote instead of his title, I think
    you’ll have to agree that it just might be worth the time.

    Rejecting someone without examination, that we at first
    see good in, simply due to a their party title, seems like
    more of the same game to me. We have to do better.

    ===============================================

    About the economy …

    I was going to go to PeanutsRevenge’s thread but see that
    BOY is posting about the economy too and it’s his thread.

    Perhaps he shares my opinion that all wars are economic in
    nature. If so, then this thread seems fine to me. Hoping he
    doesn’t slap me … I shall continue.

    Carter :

    Yes, under Carter taxes were higher and so was interest.
    It was tough times for those that had to borrow money.
    ( Comparison between Carter and Reagan terms )

    The Kuwait oil embargo of 1973 and subsequent inflation
    due to oil prices wasn’t on Carter’s watch but he paid the
    price for it. When Ford left office, Carter was thrown in
    front of the bus. His Presidency spent the next 4 years on
    life support and never recovered. Economies don’t generally
    rise and fall dramatically without prior and heavy influence.

    Inflation was high but workers contracts mandated that their
    wages would be adjusted annually to account for inflation.
    We weren’t asking for a bigger slice of the pie, only to
    receive the same size slice that we contracted for initially.

    After all, it wasn’t our mismanagement that caused trouble.

    I was banking money every week at my local savings and
    loan and getting around 6% return on my savings account.

    For me the economy was good, even paying a 50% tax rate.

    After Reagan came in the Unions took a big hit.
    All those cost of living raises evaporated. GONE.
    Wage and benefit concessions was the term used.
    We ultimately were forced to pay the price for the
    mistakes of others, that had been and still were, more
    highly compensated for their failures than we were for
    our accomplishments.

      Recent Edit : The point I intended to make was this :
      That like Carter, we never recovered. We never got the
      raise that got us back to our previous economic standing.

      In fact, as time progressed, inflation out paced the paulty
      raises that were intended to ( and did ) keep us quiet.

      “Jobs are awfully hard to get right now fellows.” seemed to
      be the motto of the day. It’s still the motto of the day.

      As the economic status of craft and other mid to upper middle
      class workers declined, the economic status of executives and
      companies skyrocketed. Surely this is not debatable in either the
      facts presented or the fairness of their actions. The result, most
      all of our wealth is concentrated at the top of the pyramid. [/Edit]

    Now, we’re lucky to get 0.05% return on our savings
    even though (with few exceptions) interest is higher
    now than it was then. Our money is buying less every
    year and keeping money in the bank has become costly.

    Investments don’t go away because of the tax rate.
    Investments go away because of a lack of confidence.

    I’m pleased that your father and I agree, put him on here.
    Maybe between the two of us we can get you ship shape.

    If you look at the historic Federal Income Tax Rates, you
    will see that the argument you proposed doesn’t stand
    scrutiny. Investors, good investors anyway, aren’t the
    type of people to loose their farm playing roulette. They
    tend to make sound investments with a high probability
    of return. This is also the sentiment of Warren Buffet.
    ( see – Quote of the Day, Aug 15, 2011 & Oct 16, 2013 )

      Recent Edit : Although the tax rate influences the net
      profit on investments. At any value less than 100%, it
      does not influence the probability of a return. [/Edit]

    =============================================

    20 MILLION Illegals :

    My point about Illegals was that the dramatic increase of
    indigents and near indigents both domestic and imported,
    has resulted in a likewise increase in social expenditures.

    And if you believe our government, a substantial increase
    in our border security enforcement and associated costs,
    along with a new bureaucracy we call Homeland Security.

    Yes, Homeland Security … and the TSA too. Also, the
    Patriot Act, and the wars and their associated costs in
    Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, etc.. All this expense,
    caused, so they say, by 19 illegals.

    Hospitals are compensated for indigent care by both, the
    rates we pay for their services and our taxes. The more they
    treat, the more we pay. Obviously, we can’t let people bleed
    out in the waiting area or tie a plastic bag over their heads
    while in an ambulance but we can start seriously working to
    lower the number of indigent and near indigent people that
    reside in our country.

    The easiest and most fair place to start seems to be that we
    enforce the visa laws and start revoking corporate charters
    for those that break the law.

    A fine can be passed on to their customers and/or shareholders.
    Charter revocation is a death sentence to their immortality.

    20 million indigent and potential hospital patients that aren’t
    supposed to be here, by rule of law, is 20 million too many.

    “They could go home.” – Helen Thomas, May 27, 2010

    “Illegal infiltrators have no privileges at the expense of
    Israeli citizens.” – P.M. Benjamin Netanyahu, October 18, 2013

      Final ? Edit : As human beings, we are obligated to provide basic
      needs to domestic infiltrators, even in prison. However, we have,
      no duty, no obligation, nor any right under law, to use our taxes
      to support the illegal Israeli infiltrators residing in Palestine.
      They need to go home too and the sooner the better.

      Our illegal infiltrators have no privileges at the expense of
      Israeli citizens. Our goyim slaves provide all of their needs.
      Now if we could just get these damn Africans out of Israel …

      What goes around, comes around, Bibi. Furthermore, if you
      ask around, you’ll find it supercedes the 10 commandments.

      Funny stuff … for Jeronimo … I couldn’t resist.

      You understand don’t you? Just for the refreshment
      of it. And to get the rancid taste out of my mouth.
      Mark Twain (semi-quote) [/Edit]

    ==============================================

    McDonald’s :

    Wages :

    The number you mentioned, 700,000 employees consists of mainly
    part time and student workers. If McDonalds and other companies
    strived for full time employees and only used part timers as trainees,
    or fill in staff, the total number of employees would decrease greatly.

    Let’s assume 50% for ease of presentation. Now you have 350,000
    employees and most likely increased profits due to happy workers, a
    low turn over rate and happy customers. 5.5 billion in profits will
    now allow you to give the full timers that $ 5.00 an hour raise you
    mentioned and still remain profitable even if sales don’t increase.

    $ 5/hr/employee x 2080 hrs/yr –> $ 10,400/yr/employee
    $ 10,400/yr/employee x 350,000 employees –> $ 3,640,000,000/yr

    If my calculations are correct, you will still have almost $ 2 BILLION
    To distribute among the share holders who have done absolutely
    nothing to generate a profit for the company. Not bad for nothing.

    CEO Compensation :

    What you seem unwilling to acknowledge is that the Pope isn’t
    worth that kind of a salary and he oversees (or Holy Sees) a much
    more diverse and wealthy business than the CEO of McDonalds.

    The work you produce, not the amount of capital that you oversee
    should be the standard to which all workers are held, Executive to
    Janitor, Pagan to Pope. Even if these guys passed golden turds,
    they couldn’t eat enough to shit out $ 13 Million a year.

    That’s the point I think you are missing.

    Assume rectal gold brings $ 1,000 per oz. (fixed) on an annual contract.

    At 1 oz. per day they could generate 365.25 ozs/year.
    At 16 ozs. per day they could generate 5,844 ozs/year.
    At two pounds per day, ( HEALTHY !! ) they could generate 11,688 ozs./yr.
    Times $ 1,000 per oz. and that’s still only $ 11,688,000/ year.

    Now, consider that most foods are at least 80% water.
    And that gold contains 0 % water.

    If 50% of the food is consumed by the metabolism,
    and 50% (minus the water) is converted into gold,
    how many pounds of food per day are required to
    produce 2 pounds of anhydrous rectal gold ?

    Given that an additional pound ( 1 pint ) of water per
    pound of food, will be required, calculate the water required.

    Is it feasible that anyone could consume, on a daily
    basis, the total amount of food and water required ?

    I say no but I’ll leave the final calculations to you.

    Have fun with that … No copyright … But a
    link back to this post would be appreciated.

    NOTE : A link in an Algebra book would be terrific !

    I could care less about the advertising expenses as I’m neither a
    customer nor a stock holder. It was the idea of wasting money on
    expensive ads they know aren’t likely to be worth the cost just to
    inflate their egos and those of the stockholders, when paying their
    employees decently is not one of their primary concerns.

    ==============================================

    Your final point reminds me of a movie I saw a long time ago.
    The Poseidon Adventure. The boat was sinking. Then,
    all of a sudden, it was turned upside down.
    But the water didn’t run out.
    The boat kept on
    sinking.

    When things are as topsy turvy as they are now, you
    can’t bring up the bottom before pulling down the top.

    Imagine a pyramid shape and that you start moving the
    blocks from the bottom before moving the blocks on top.

    Best wishes to you and yours and best wishes to you all.

    Sincerely,

    Rommel

      P.S. – Good post BOY but I can’t type a decent reply to it.

      My posts to Deathbal although enjoyable, take several hours to
      compose and drain me, sometimes, more than may be healthy.

      Intensive thought is said to consume a large amount of energy.
      Yeah, yeah, I hear you. Where’s the evidence ? Funny stuff …

      I hope, all of you have the time and energy to read this post and
      still and have enough left over to read the entire thread that BOY
      started. It’s one of the best you’re likely to find here.

      I intend to send a reply to you very soon BOY. Until then …

      To you both : Welcome to the Brotherhood. KAWSIME !

      To the rest of you : It’s great fun.
      “Try it, you’ll like it !” – Pepto Bismol

      NOTE : EDITED 11 TIMES IN TOTAL – KAWSIME !

    #57921

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi BOY :

    Have you seen Willis ?

    Thanks for the linked article. It makes it hard to ignore that we’re
    “rolling down hill like a snowball headed for hell.” – Merle Haggard

    It’s getting more difficult to find a decent
    place to spend money in good conscience.

    Most everywhere you go you see someone that is working
    multiple part-time jobs and barely making it on there own
    and others that still aren’t able to make it without help.

    There’s a discussion here someplace where Deathbal and I
    considered the moral bankruptcy of companies that did not
    pay their workers a livable wage. My opinion was that we
    can’t afford them. If they can’t operate and be an asset to
    the community, we need to stop supporting them. Public,
    private, and the guy that has a landscaping company too.

    A business license should indicate to the customers and the
    employees, that the business will be operated in the best
    interests of the community without consideration to profits.

    Not, operated in the best interests of profits
    without consideration of the community.

    When we require that, slave labor will be a thing of the past.

    Until we do this, good companies, of all sizes, will be under
    ever increasing pressure to follow suit to remain competitive.

    If we allow the current trends to continue, at some
    point, the vanishing middle class, vanishes completely.

    =================================================

    I think that answered all of your questions except
    for the salaries of CEO’s versus the Landscapers.

    Yes, at least one and perhaps many more. The first
    that came to mind is termination salary and benefits
    ( Golden Parachutes ) that follow the CEO’s even if
    they bankrupt the company and have to close it.

    The Landscaper is dependant on the profitability of
    the business to pay the employees that generate
    income for the company. Without the employees,
    the owner will have no income and no business.

    Therefore, the small business owner is under more
    pressure to maintain profitability than many of the
    CEO’s, and also under more pressure to treat the
    employees fairly.

    This is why we should support our local small
    business owners as much as possible. Even if
    Wal-Mart is a little ( or a great deal ) cheaper,
    the benefits to the community are likely greater
    by supporting small business owners.

    If that sounds Socialist and I think it does, that
    doesn’t make it a bad way to think or act to me.

    Before signing off, I meant to say this before :

    It was a surprise and a pleasure to read the post where
    you said that you had changed your vote on the war.

    Take good care,

    Rommel

    #57923

    Rommel
    Participant

    .

    #57922

    Deathbal
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    Hi Deathbal :

    Before you reply, I have to know … Have you seen Willis ?

    NO.

    On the war :

    We agree on Mr. Sanders war stance but feel differently about
    his title. No problem. If we forget the title and look at some of
    his other policy statements, it seems likely that we may find
    others, where the three of us agree. That is a good start.

    If we were to find more places where we agree with him,
    than with the non-socialists, and these were topics of
    high importance, then the title Socialist and the type of
    Socialism he favors might be something we’d approve.

    I know that thought is bothersome to you, but if you’ll
    think about what I just wrote instead of his title, I think
    you’ll have to agree that it just might be worth the time.

    Rejecting someone without examination, that we at first
    see good in, simply due to a their party title, seems like
    more of the same game to me. We have to do better.

    I am not going to say I disagree with everything concerning Sanders. But for every one item I like, there are 4-5 I do not. Below is a list of a few.

    Paycheck Fairness Act.
    Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012.
    DISCLOSE Act.
    Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act.
    Also a supporter of a single payer system.

    If you have anything specific in mind, feel free to elaborate. I know, I didn’t need to say “elaborate”. 😀

    One thing I did notice with various policy ideas. If the politician knows they are over reaching, they like to attach the word “fair” in any number of its various forms in an attempt to negate what it truly is. You can add “The Fairness Doctrine” to that list as Sanders is a supporter. Something designed to silence opposition.

    About the economy …

    Carter :

    Investments don’t go away because of the tax rate.
    Investments go away because of a lack of confidence.

    I’m pleased that your father and I agree, put him on here.
    Maybe between the two of us we can get you ship shape.

    I can’t put him on here, he is no longer among the living. But he was one of the victims of Reagan and deregulation. A lot of what you said in the above (that I lopped off) is true. But many factors played into that scenario, not just Tax cuts and deregulation. No matter what your taxes are, if your country slowly turns into a catering economy, those will be the results. We have lost a ton of our industry.

    As far as your comments on investments, it is true to a point. Because investment boomed due to what Reagan did. I don’t care how smart of an investor you are. There are very few “sure things” when it comes to investment. Money/profit is the incentive for investment. Confidence plays a huge role, of course. But if you’re not getting a big return, your incentive wanes.

    If you look at the historic Federal Income Tax Rates, you
    will see that the argument you proposed doesn’t stand
    scrutiny. Investors, good investors anyway, aren’t the
    type of people to loose their farm playing roulette. They
    tend to make sound investments with a high probability
    of return. This is also the sentiment of Warren Buffet.

    You cannot compare income rates from the past and apply them to the economy of today. Different economy, different workforce, and for the most part, an entirely different country.

    As far as W. Buffet goes, he lost me with his secretary comments. Then our President uses his comments to justify raising tax brackets. All the while no one seems to mention that income taxes are not the same as (Cap. Gains) wealth taxes. The slew of misinformation that followed was unimaginable. The result, you literally had people believe they were paying higher income taxes than the rich.

    Although the tax rate influences the net
    profit on investments. At any value less than 100%, it
    does not influence the probability of a return.

    No argument there. But the return itself influences the probability of the investment. It’s just human nature. Have you ever seen how long the lines get for the lottery when the pot is really high? Are they all waiting in lines that go out into the street because the probability of winning has increased or stayed the same? No. They do it because there is more to make on their tiny investment.

    20 MILLION Illegals :

    The easiest and most fair place to start seems to be that we
    enforce the visa laws and start revoking corporate charters
    for those that break the law.

    A fine can be passed on to their customers and/or shareholders.
    Charter revocation is a death sentence to their immortality.

    20 million indigent and potential hospital patients that aren’t
    supposed to be here, by rule of law, is 20 million too many.

    We are obligated to provide basic needs to
    domestic ifiltrators, even in prison. However, we have,
    no duty, no obligation, nor any right under law, to
    support foriegn infiltrators with our tax dollars. They can
    go home as well.

    I agree.

    McDonald’s :

    Wages :

    The number you mentioned, 700,000 employees consists of mainly
    part time and student workers. If McDonalds and other companies
    strived for full time employees and only used part timers as trainees,
    or fill in staff, the total number of employees would decrease greatly.

    Let’s assume 50% for ease of presentation. Now you have 350,000
    employees and most likely increased profits due to happy workers, a
    low turn over rate and happy customers. 5.5 billion in profits will
    now allow you to give the full timers that $ 5.00 an hour raise you
    mentioned and still remain profitable even if sales don’t increase.

    $ 5/hr/employee x 2080 hrs/yr –> $ 10,400/yr/employee
    $ 10,400/yr/employee x 350,000 employees –> $ 3,640,000,000/yr

    If my calculations are correct, you will still have almost $ 2 BILLION
    To distribute among the share holders who have done absolutely
    nothing to generate a profit for the company. Not bad for nothing.

    Agreed on the part time/full time. An oversight on my part. But the rest is where we don’t agree. You’re asking a company that makes almost 27 billion in revenue to cut more than half of their net income? On what grounds? That 2 billion is a lot? I’d be with you if the net income was higher, but I think they are where they need to be as a company.

    I will agree with you that it would be nice if they did that. As a result I think they would have a lot more employees that care about their job. As it is now I never go to fast food restaurants because I don’t trust their food. But the numbers you put forth simply isn’t realistic.

    CEO Compensation :

    What you seem unwilling to acknowledge is that the Pope isn’t
    worth that kind of a salary and he oversees (or Holy Sees) a much
    more diverse and wealthy business than the CEO of McDonalds.

    The work you produce, not the amount of capital that you oversee
    should be the standard to which all workers are held, Executive to
    Janitor, Pagan to Pope. Even if these guys passed golden turds,
    they couldn’t eat enough to shit out $ 13 Million a year.

    That’s the point I think you are missing.

    I have heard your argument before. The man isn’t worth that much money. Well, either is Tony Romo, but the going rate is what it is regardless of worth. Want him, or not?

    My point is, I don’t care if he is worth the 13.8 million a year he makes. What impact does his salary have on the employees of McDonald’s? Virtually none. It’s an argument based on envy more than anything else.

    #57924

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Deathbal :

    Just a short note to let you know that my reply is underway. You crack
    me up, “No need to ask you to elaborate” (semi-quote). If I thought I
    could say more by saying less, I honestly would and sometimes, I do.

    If I thought I could say the same and be understood using less words,
    I would and although it might not seem so, I trash quite a bit of stuff.

    My condolences on the passing of your father. I was looking forward
    to seeing a message from another old timer. Hopefully, like me, your
    father still lives in your memories and is never more than a moment
    away in times of need. “What would dad say ?”

    Sincerely,

    Rommel

    #57925

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Deathbal :

    “I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be?” – V for Vendetta

    On the war and Senator Sanders :

    The object of the exercise was to find high importance topics,
    like the one I opened with, where we would be in agreement.
    Going for his throat, as your first move, makes it appear that
    you aren’t interested in giving him a sporting chance at you.

    Perhaps you couldn’t find any, if so. That’s fine. If you have
    school age children or heavens to Pete, grandchildren, you
    might look into his filibuster attempt. The ability of us all to
    receive a quality education, limited only by our potential for
    learning and understanding, should be a primary goal for all
    Citizens, whether they have children or not.

    The single payer system I envision would be good for all but
    insurance companies and those with investments in them, as
    it would stop the excessive profiting off of the desperate.

    It’s acceptable to try and gouge someone’s eyes out on a car
    sale, because the buyer isn‘t being forced to accept your price.

    It’s something altogether different when you’re standing in the
    emergency room with a dying child in your arms and the first
    thing they want is your insurance card and then watching as
    they check to see how much care your child can afford. All the
    while you keep telling them that you’ll sign anything, pay any
    price. This is not a valid contract due to duress but in spite of
    that technicality, it’s all perfectly legal and legally binding.

    If they find you to be a good credit risk, you’ll pay, and
    pay dearly, regardless of the outcome. If not … your child
    may die, due to the critical condition of your credit rating.

    And if you think that this doesn‘t happen, please talk to
    people that work in intensive care, hospice, emergency
    rooms and geriatric centers. People die all the time, due,
    not to their medical condition, but their financial status.

    Catch Phrases :

    Excellent observation my friend, thank you. I will have my
    staff look into those policy statements and get back to you.

    He will too. ‘Cause he’s a rouge renegade.
    Just like me. Wink, wink, you betcha.

    Carter :

    If I ever say anything untrue, please let me know with specificity,
    so I can not only make amends but educate myself to my errors.
    And rest easy with my firm commitment to do the same for you.

    Comparing 70’s dollar’s to today’s dollars is not fair without taking
    inflation into account. As for the tax rate charged on capital gains,
    the evidence is there and is not disputable. The percentage charged
    is not subject to misinterpretation due to other factors.

    Investors in the 70’s could earn 6% by leaving their money in the
    bank. Instead they chose to invest it, even at what you feel is a
    rate that was too high to charge them.

    This is direct evidence against Grover Norquist.

    Given a 90% percent chance of a 50% return, only a
    fool would say, not unless the tax rate is less than 25%.

    Note : The capital gains tax is an income tax. It grants
    special favors to the wealthy that working people aren’t
    entitled to but comes under the U.S. Income Tax Code.
    ( see : USC : Title 26 – INTERNAL REVENUE CODE )

    The reason that I believe that the middle class pays a higher
    tax rate ( were back to percentages ) than the upper class
    investors is because I can not only read the tax code and
    understand it, I can do mathematics and think for myself.

    15% is less 28% and until 2 + 2 = 5 it always will be.

    No, people buy lottery tickets because they are morons.

    McDonald’s :

    Wages :

    My grounds are simple. Because it’s right thing to do. If you
    were making $ 8.00 per hour instead of getting $ 30.00 per hour
    performing the same function you do now, perhaps you could
    see this. Other than subjecting you to poverty, I’m out of ideas.

    CEO Compensation :

    I doubt that the CEO is the only one making more than $ 1 Million a
    year. But no matter, on that. So what if they are all buddies and they
    all serve on each others board of directors and give each other lavish
    lifestyles at the expense of the workers. Perhaps PeanutsRevenge is
    right and all manual labor positions should be filled by robots.

    However, even though I have been intimate with quite a few
    robots, I feel sure, I will always prefer working with people.

    Aymay eacepay ebay ithway ouyay,

    Rommel


      P.S.
      : In case you missed my encoded and secret message :

      Your final point reminds me of a life I lived a long time ago
      aboard the USS-USA. The boat was sinking. Then,
      all of a sudden, it was turned upside down.
      But the water didn’t trickle down like
      they said it said it would. The
      boat kept right on sinking.

      There are some codes, usually between friends, that can not be
      cracked, by anyone or any machine, with any degree of certainty.

      Ain’t life grand !

      Oh yeah … One more thing. The first of the “entitlements” to be
      eliminated, should be entitlements ( like the capital gains tax ) for
      the wealthy. Same answer … Because it’s the right thing to do.

    #57926

    Deathbal
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    Hi Deathbal :

    On the war and Senator Sanders :

    The object of the exercise was to find high importance topics,
    like the one I opened with, where we would be in agreement.
    Going for his throat, as your first move, makes it appear that
    you aren’t interested in giving him a sporting chance at you.

    Perhaps you couldn’t find any, if so. That’s fine. If you have
    school age children or heavens to Pete, grandchildren, you
    might look into his filibuster attempt. The ability of us all to
    receive a quality education, limited only by our potential for
    learning and understanding, should be a primary goal for all
    Citizens, whether they have children or not.

    I did find some things I agreed with him on, just not enough. There were also some deal breakers. I would also like to know what his opinion is on a good tax code. That means a lot. And to tell you the truth, i’m not confident i’d like it.

    It’s something altogether different when you’re standing in the
    emergency room with a dying child in your arms and the first
    thing they want is your insurance card and then watching as
    they check to see how much care your child can afford. All the
    while you keep telling them that you’ll sign anything, pay any
    price. This is not a valid contract due to duress but in spite of
    that technicality, it’s all perfectly legal and legally binding.

    If they find you to be a good credit risk, you’ll pay, and
    pay dearly, regardless of the outcome. If not … your child
    may die, due to the critical condition of your credit rating.

    I can only speak for myself here, but I was uninsured for about 5 years of my life. I did go to the emergency room on at least three occasions for non life threatening events. The only difference I noticed between no insurance and being insured was, they didn’t run a battery of needless tests. Other than that I was well taken care of. Oh and, they sent me a bill. 😯

    ‘Cause he’s a rouge renegade.
    Just like me. Wink, wink, you betcha.

    What I find interesting about comments like these are that they persist after 5 years with a proven amateur in the Whitehouse. Not only that, but the victorious VP is stunningly ignorant. You can’t get worse than a jester next in line to be president.

    Carter :

    If I ever say anything untrue, please let me know with specificity,
    so I can not only make amends but educate myself to my errors.
    And rest easy with my firm commitment to do the same for you.

    Comparing 70’s dollar’s to today’s dollars is not fair without taking
    inflation into account. As for the tax rate charged on capital gains,
    the evidence is there and is not disputable. The percentage charged
    is not subject to misinterpretation due to other factors.

    Investors in the 70’s could earn 6% by leaving their money in the
    bank. Instead they chose to invest it, even at what you feel is a
    rate that was too high to charge them.

    This is direct evidence against Grover Norquist.

    Given a 90% percent chance of a 50% return, only a
    fool would say, not unless the tax rate is less than 25%.

    Ok, not sure what your point is with all of this, but i’ll respond to the last part. You gave an ideal example and are using it to make your case. Those types aren’t the norm. Do you want to limit investment to near sure things?

    Note : The capital gains tax is an income tax. It grants
    special favors to the wealthy that working people aren’t
    entitled to but comes under the U.S. Income Tax Code.

    Semantics. Any gains is income. But any income from your wealth is not treated the same as the income tax brackets.

    The reason that I believe that the middle class pays a higher
    tax rate ( were back to percentages ) than the upper class
    investors is because I can not only read the tax code and
    understand it, I can do mathematics and think for myself.

    15% is less 28% and until 2 + 2 = 5 it always will be.

    But the 15% is not an income tax bracket percentage. It is a capital gains tax, the same for everyone. It is a bit ridiculous to expect someone to pay 28% or 39% on the sale of their house.

    CEO Compensation :

    I doubt that the CEO is the only one making more than $ 1 Million a
    year. But no matter, on that. So what if they are all buddies and they
    all serve on each others board of directors and give each other lavish
    lifestyles at the expense of the workers. Perhaps PeanutsRevenge is
    right and all manual labor positions should be filled by robots.

    I think you’re right. Probably over 100.

    Oh and, speaking of robots. I believe there was a company in Australia back in the 70’s that replaced their employees with pigeons to work the conveyor belt items. They were found to be quite reliable. But a ruling came down that it was cruelty to animals. So the humans came back! If you don’t see the irony in that…….

    P.S : In case you missed my encoded and secret message :

    You’re right, I did miss this.

    You, along with many others failed to recognize the key word in “Trickle down Economics”. Care to take a guess? I’ll give you a hint. If you asked someone how the weather was, and they told you the rain is trickling down, do you get into your knee high wading boots?

    Trickle down economics is exactly that, you get some leftover scraps. What did you really expect? Think of a Union at the bargaining table and their company has their books open. Their contract is fought for based on what primarily? You better believe that Rep. wants to see nice profits. The bigger the profits the better the contract, trickle down.

    It was never meant to shower people with money. It isn’t even an economic system, it’s more of a concept. the basic idea is, a company makes more, they may expand their business. As a result more employees are hired. That does not mean employees are paid more, just more employment. So obviously the business sees double the profit while employees see the same pay.

    You don’t have to tell me demand is the driving factor for a business to expand. Like I said, it is a concept based on the demand already being present.

    Oh yeah … One more thing. The first of the “entitlements” to be
    eliminated, should be entitlements ( like the capital gains tax ) for
    the wealthy. Same answer … Because it’s the right thing to do.

    What do you propose? Have any ideas? I would also like to know one minor detail, what do you consider wealthy? Another thing to consider. Even if you got your wish, and the “wealthy” paid a higher tax for Cap. Gains, that is not putting a single dollar in that Burger King employees check. Congress would simply waste it.

    The “Paying a Fair Share Act” is nothing more than a congressional money grab named appropriately to stir up class envy. I can guarantee you our poverty rate would not drop a single iota as a result. Speaking of fair. What about a good portion of the population paying little to nothing in federal income taxes? I have the firm belief that everyone should have some skin in the game. Or better yet, instead of redefining the word “fair”, come up with a different term regarding who pays taxes and how much.

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 125 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.