WTF ....250K = Corporate Jet?????

[dezfan]

No one ever points out the greatest flaw in the Liberal argument against these evil rich.

To accept that some people suffer financially because other people are too wealthy is to believe there's a LIMITED amount of money to be had in this country, like there's ONE BIG PILE OF MONEY which we could help ourselves to but, those damned rich people have taken too much!

I think this attitude is linked to the Liberal distain of individualism and the potential of an individual to chart their own destiny and make their own fortune! It's what made this Nation great IMO! Instead the Liberals would prefer to think for us. They see us as obviously to stupid or lazy to think for ourselves.

I have yet to meet a Liberal who had a realistic appreciation of freedom. I think they're scared of freedom and the individual responsibility that accompanies it. They prefer the cocoon of equal misery for all under the thump of the nanny state

The more I encounter those who are Liberal, the more I am convinced that Liberalism is some form of a mental disorder.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by sloppy

I dont buy it... why dont you show me some pie charts or actual proof that all these so called poor people dont matter... You know the people that not only pay no tax at all, but also get huge tax credits(more then they even make sometimes) so WE pay them to stay in a shitty job.. Not only do we give the tax breaks we subsidize them with other government handouts..

No pie chart needed. 80% of the population hold less than 10% of the wealth in this country. There is simply not much money there to tap in to.

Say you've got 100 people in a room. Collectively they have $100. Split them up into two groups, one with 80 people and one with 20 people. Take $10 and distribute it to the larger group, and take $90 and distribute it to the smaller group. Now, impose a 25% flat tax on everyone. You'll get $2.50 from the big group, and $27.50 from the small group.

Concerning "shitty jobs", sometimes that is all there is, and maybe all there will be. Not every city and town or even county has spectacular job opportunities, and not everyone can afford to move someplace that does. A couple of years ago 5000 people lost their jobs in this area within just a few months (gather everyone up in a 20 mile radius and you might hit 200k). It was devastating. Not everyone could afford to move, but those who could did. Most had no choice but to ditch their homes, file for unemployment, and hope for the best. Even today, any low paying job that pops up in the local paper is snapped up so quickly it'll make your head spin. People have actually had to run new ads asking people not to call anymore because its making their phones unusable.

Originally Posted by sloppy

No matter how you spin it a person making a million a year even if they pay no tax at all contributes more to society then a 100 people making 16K.. A million a year you buy things big freaking expensive things which employee's people that make and sell that shit.. and odds are you also employee several people..

Fine, I'll try and spin it this way. Our economy is based upon consumerism. The more people there are spending money, the better things are. The key word there is "people", not "money". Yes, a rich person spends more money, but on fewer things. A less than rich person still buys stuff, and there are more less than rich people than there are actual rich people. It takes the same amount of people to build a Corvette as it does to build an Aveo, but you'll find many more Aveo's than you will Corvettes. You'll also find more Aveo's being driven every day instead of being garaged 325 days out of the year.

Originally Posted by sloppy

Everyone should pay to support the country that would be a fair system.. No one should get more money back then they paid into the tax system that is wrong rich or poor..

Agreed. If you pay nothing, you get nothing. People shouldn't be rewarded for pumping out shithead kids.

Originally Posted by sloppy

and if 16K is not shit. and 10% of that is 1600 it takes less then 20 people to pay for the increase that you seem more then happy to throw at the so called rich.. I am gonna guess there is more then 20 people making 16K for every 1 person making a million a year..

The issue is that that $1600 has a larger impact on their lives because they already have little money to begin with.

Originally Posted by tom@vp

they should tax imports from countries that manipulate their currency to fund a global manufacturing war, who also happen to tax imports from the USA 30 percent.. shrug would bring jobs back by the hundreds of thousands.

There are some companies already moving back, and more that are seriously considering it. China's wages are rising to the point where it is nowhere near as profitable for companies to be there as it once was.

Take a look at some of the German corporations. They were on the verge of moving out, but somewhere deep down inside they felt a tiny bit of compassion for their fellow countrymen and decided to just dig in, create jobs, pump up their own economy, and make things better for everyone. Meanwhile, American companies are too busy making money offshore to notice...

Originally Posted by tom@vp

and since we see the military is a tremendous chunk of our deficit, stop protecting other countries that give nothing in return...

Yup. Especially those that harbor our enemies.

Originally Posted by tom@vp

and drill for our own oil this would produce tens of thousands of jobs and keep the bazillions of that spent here instead of going to people that hate us..

Thats right! I'm tired of seeing our money go to that evil, godless Canadia!

Originally Posted by tom@vp

every 10,000 jobs paying even 40,000 per year brought back here is 400,000,000 in taxable revenue, that gets spent here, thats stimulation. how many millions of jobs have we lost ?

Too many. You can blame the unions, you can blame the workers, but in the end its the corporations choice to stay or go. If they were half as dedicated to their country as they were to their bottom line and their shareholders, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by dezfan

To accept that some people suffer financially because other people are too wealthy is to believe there's a LIMITED amount of money to be had in this country, like there's ONE BIG PILE OF MONEY which we could help ourselves to but, those damned rich people have taken too much!

There is, in fact, a set amount of money in circulation ($829 billion to be exact). No more, no less. It is watched very carefully, as the more cash that there is available, the less it is worth. Yes, we can print more money, but with the consiquence of devaluing what is already out there. When we take out a loan from the Fed, that is exactly what is happening. The Fed will print all the money we ask, if we were to ask. Its our noose to wear...

Since we get all of our currency from the Fed, we have to pay them for it via interest (essentially it is a loan). The more money released for circulation, the more we owe back. And again, since every dollar in circulation (both real and electronic) represents our debt to the Fed, we are in a state of perpetual debt that we can never recover from with this system.

When you cash your paycheck that money doesn't come from fairy land, it comes from your employer who up until recently owned that money. Now they have that much less, but hopefully they will make that money back (plus some) from someone else who gives them their money for the service or product that your employer provides. And so the cycle continues.

Since you clearly have no clue as to how our money system is set up, how in the world do you think "trickle down economics" works?

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

There is a really good doc about that somewhere, I'll see if I can dig it up.

Not the specific one I'm looking for, but covers the same stuff

Money, Banking, and the Federal Reserve
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/money-banking/

[binaryterror]

Originally Posted by TexasSP

30k per year is another employee that could have a job.

What?

That would place the GROSS salary to this employee to between $15K and $20K yearly (~$7 hourly). You forget, the company pays taxes and other benefits on employees.

If a guy is making $1Mil and thinks hiring another $15-$20K employee would save his company, not much chance of that company surviving.

[sloppy]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

No pie chart needed. 80% of the population hold less than 10% of the wealth in this country. There is simply not much money there to tap in to.

Say you've got 100 people in a room. Collectively they have $100. Split them up into two groups, one with 80 people and one with 20 people. Take $10 and distribute it to the larger group, and take $90 and distribute it to the smaller group. Now, impose a 25% flat tax on everyone. You'll get $2.50 from the big group, and $27.50 from the small group.


Fine, I'll try and spin it this way. Our economy is based upon consumerism. The more people there are spending money, the better things are. The key word there is "people", not "money". Yes, a rich person spends more money, but on fewer things. A less than rich person still buys stuff, and there are more less than rich people than there are actual rich people. It takes the same amount of people to build a Corvette as it does to build an Aveo, but you'll find many more Aveo's than you will Corvettes. You'll also find more Aveo's being driven every day instead of being garaged 325 days out of the year.

that is weird so what you are saying is that because there are more poor people and they spend money they make more of a difference.. But not if the pay some tax. So for spending money they can help, but by helping society they dont matter, society just has to keep helping them..


You know what makes allot more sense give 80% of the population no taxation and handouts,, they dont need jobs or self worth. they are now baby making voting machine's... they cant be taxed because its to scary to go after your main voter base..

you keep making up BS on why they dont matter or because it would hurt them more.. its about votes thats it.. Neither group can solve the problem threw more tax's...

getting rid of these programs that encourages poorness is the problem its always been the problem every one of your damn charts shows its the problem.. the poor not paying tax is one of those entitlements.. if they paid tax and it hurt they would not be so fast to say tax the rich.

I pay tax every year and guess what I dont want to pay more it hurts, I know "rich" people it hurts them to. I also know poor people they look forward to tax time they get their reward for blowing out baby's and being lazy..

and some how you want me to give a rats ass if it hurts them??? the same people with steaks in their shopping cart paying with a free food card. when I am buying Freaking hot dogs with my money.. Tax time its ramen noodles for me..

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

Too many. You can blame the unions, you can blame the workers, but in the end its the corporations choice to stay or go. If they were half as dedicated to their country as they were to their bottom line and their shareholders, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this.

While I agree with you on this, I dont think that every company sees it as a "choice".....some feel that they MUST reduce production costs and not raise the product price or else they will lose their customers and go under. I've actually had this exact argument with a vendor on this board who reduced quality so that his price could remain the same. He couldn't understand why I was upset with that fact and was shocked when I asked him to maintain his quality and raise his price. I dont buy from him any longer.

It wont be changed until the general public realizes that a quality product will save them money over their lifetime....as opposed to a $7 refrigerator that you throw away every 6 months.....

What I find completely appalling is when a "to big to fail" company accepts billions in taxpayer money, AKA, a "bailout" and uses that money to fund the creation of jobs in another country. I cant believe that our government allows this to happen.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by sloppy

that is weird so what you are saying is that because there are more poor people and they spend money they make more of a difference.. But not if the pay some tax. So for spending money they can help, but by helping society they dont matter, society just has to keep helping them..


You know what makes allot more sense give 80% of the population no taxation and handouts,, they dont need jobs or self worth. they are now baby making voting machine's... they cant be taxed because its to scary to go after your main voter base..

I never said it makes sense, it doesn't make sense to me either. You can't just tell someone to get off their ass and get a job when there aren't any available.

How about this: when unemployment drops to a certain percentage point, able bodied people are no longer eligible for assistance. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Originally Posted by JeremyH

While I agree with you on this, I dont think that every company sees it as a "choice".....some feel that they MUST reduce production costs and not raise the product price or else they will lose their customers and go under. I've actually had this exact argument with a vendor on this board who reduced quality so that his price could remain the same. He couldn't understand why I was upset with that fact and was shocked when I asked him to maintain his quality and raise his price. I dont buy from him any longer.

It wont be changed until the general public realizes that a quality product will save them money over their lifetime....as opposed to a $7 refrigerator that you throw away every 6 months.....

What I find completely appalling is when a "to big to fail" company accepts billions in taxpayer money, AKA, a "bailout" and uses that money to fund the creation of jobs in another country. I cant believe that our government allows this to happen.

They could also work closer to their bottom line. Just because profit goes down doesn't always mean that prices should go up. Think of how much cheaper some products would be if the CEO's weren't making tens of millions a year. Guys in healthcare, oil, medical supplies, all of them make between 20 and 80 million a year. And that is just one top level employee.

Walmart is a good example of cheap chit at cheap prices. But that is what people want...not a lasting product that is worth the extra $, but cheap crap that is easy on the wallet.

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

Walmart is a good example of cheap chit at cheap prices. But that is what people want...not a lasting product that is worth the extra $, but cheap crap that is easy on the wallet.

And their founder is a good example of how the head of a major company didnt need to make 10 figures per year. I do not like WM, but I respect Sam Walton and his methods of operating his stores while not earning a ridiculous salary. He was a humble person who built an empire from nothing. His family has since destroyed that in the 20 years that he has been dead.

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

How about this: when unemployment drops to a certain percentage point, able bodied people are no longer eligible for assistance. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Haha. You do know that the "unemployment rate" is based not on the number of people actually out of work, but the number of people who are accepting benefits, right?

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JeremyH

Haha. You do know that the "unemployment rate" is based not on the number of people actually out of work, but the number of people who are accepting benefits, right?

I do now.

Well thats a fawked up way to measure unemployment.

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

I do now.

Well thats a fawked up way to measure unemployment.

There's not really any other way to measure the rate. That is why last year when Congress did not extend benefits and were not accepting new claims, the unemployment rate "dropped" slightly. There are lots of different factors that would change the unemployment rate that dont seem to be factored into their "equation"....

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by JeremyH

There's not really any other way to measure the rate. That is why last year when Congress did not extend benefits and were not accepting new claims, the unemployment rate "dropped" slightly. There are lots of different factors that would change the unemployment rate that dont seem to be factored into their "equation"....

While they might not be able to get immediate results, they could check employment records. If someone were to lose their job, they'd be out of the payroll and tax pool. For the most part it would be safe to assume that if you've dropped out of the system, you aren't working.

[sloppy]

Originally Posted by Duuuuuuuude

I never said it makes sense, it doesn't make sense to me either. You can't just tell someone to get off their ass and get a job when there aren't any available.

How about this: when unemployment drops to a certain percentage point, able bodied people are no longer eligible for assistance. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

The hell you cant... I told my son to get off his ass and get a job... I know damn well its gonna be hard to find work, hell I know I would not hire him when I can get experience for the same money at this point.. But he was not doing shit else he can go and look and when he gets tired of looking. he can look some more Or use his big fat brain and make a job.. I did I made work when I was a stupid kid and I made good money. Rich people always need something shitty done.. pick up crap, wash their cars they dont drive..

How about this I will give you 6 months of unemployment if you have not found work at the end of that time your not looking hard enough or your standards are to high.. at the end of 6 months you get jack shit go starve. Compassion is Bull shit..

Heck if your able bodied and cant find work and have looked maybe you should look into the military We dont seem to be slowing with starting wars. Last recruiter I talked to said they are hiring..

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by sloppy

Heck if your able bodied and cant find work and have looked maybe you should look into the military We dont seem to be slowing with starting wars. Last recruiter I talked to said they are hiring..

Sure, that'll cost tax payers even more. That is unless they are paying soldiers less than $250 a week...

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by sloppy

How about this I will give you 6 months of unemployment if you have not found work at the end of that time your not looking hard enough or your standards are to high.. at the end of 6 months you get jack shit go starve. Compassion is Bull shit..

If your son had not been able to find a job would you have stopped feeding, clothing, and housing him? Would he also have gotten the "jack shit go starve" speach?

You live in Akron, a fair sized city with lots of opportunities. I used to live in Phoenix which is a large city and even though there are quite a few who are unemployed, there are plenty of opportunities to earn a buck or two. It probably isn't going to be ideal work at ideal pay, but its something.

That is not always the case in small towns. Where I live, the biggest city within an hours drive hold a whopping 14,000 citizens. When the economy takes a turn, businesses drop like flies. When businesses go, so do jobs. Then spending, then more businesses, then more jobs, on and on and on. Right off the top of my head I can count 6 gas stations, 4 restaurants, the mini-golf/go-kart place, a shoe store, 2 banks, 3 car dealerships, 1 boat dealer, and 2 tire shops that have gone under this year, and those are just the ones I drive past almost daily. These are all small, one owner/mom & pop type small businesses. Now add in the 3000 jobs lost in the bass boat plants here, a few more hundred from the hydraulic hose plant, a hundred or so from the textiles plant, the plastics plant, and the medical supplies plant. All of this is devastating to the local economy. Low or no-skill job opportunities are nearly non-existant and if one comes up, its filled almost immediately. A couple years ago I was going through the list of job openings supplied by the local unemployment office and going around filling out applications. Nearly every place I stopped had a stack of filled out apps at least a couple inches tall sitting on the counter. In some places its hard to find a job, in others, its next to impossible. The only thing that could turn it all around is if someone comes and invests money by starting or expanding a business. There has been a little of that here, but not much, certainly not enough.

[dezfan]

There is more to wealth, than just the amount of currency in circulation.

But gosh, since I have no idea what I'm talking about, I guess I should stop caring, stop working to improve my lot in life, vote Lib, and be happy w/ the crumbs they drop on the floor.

I make much more today than what I made 20 years ago, is that some kind of accident? Obviously working harder, being innovative, and sheer determination have absolutly no impact on what someone can earn.

After all since there is that finite amount of currency in circulation, I guess that means that there is a predetermined factor in how much wealth I can amass.

If I earn more next year, should send it back? It must be some kind of a mistake right?

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by dezfan

I make much more today than what I made 20 years ago, is that some kind of accident? Obviously working harder, being innovative, and sheer determination have absolutly no impact on what someone can earn.

After all since there is that finite amount of currency in circulation, I guess that means that there is a predetermined factor in how much wealth I can amass.

If I earn more next year, should send it back? It must be some kind of a mistake right?

The only predetermined factor is that you will never own all of it.

I'm going to assume that you haven't made your money by acting like a sore loser when someone corrects you.

Is there a finite amount of money? Yes. That is a fact. You can go right to the Fed if you don't believe me.

Is it possible to advance in your career and make more of that money for yourself? Yes, but only if the career path you have chosen has is deemed worthy by employers to grant an increase in pay over and above a cost of living raise.

You will not become a millionaire or billionaire just because you work hard or get an education, or even be innovative. If it were that easy everyone would be doing it. You have to talk the right people out of the right amount of money at the right time repeatedly to achieve that kind of monetary success. You also have to know how to work the system, and at some point put ethics aside momentarily and focus on the dollars. A good bit of luck will also go a long ways.

On to "currency" and "wealth". Currency is the available form of money on hand that can be used for exchange for goods and services. Right? Wealth, on the other hand, is considered items of value that are not currency. Right?

Both are subjective to the ups and downs of the market. The more there is of something, the less its worth. You can have money in the bank, or you can have "investments" in various other forms that give you wealth because someone determined that it was worth something. It is easily possible that there is more wealth than there is currency, which is not a problem until people start cashing in on that wealth. Bill Gates has a wealth of $50+ billion, but he doesn't have it all in cash, laying around the house. Much of it is in property and investments. That $50b is not a guaranteed sum if he were to sell it all tomorrow. You can throw numbers at things all day long, but they're only worth what someone is willing to pay.

[dezfan]

Really, I will never own all of it?

You'll make a great used car salesman.

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by dezfan

Really, I will never own all of it?

You'll make a great used car salesman.

I'm a very poor salesman. I honestly am not very good at separating people from their money, even when they want to give it to me.

For you to own everything, that would have to mean that everyone else would own nothing. Unless you were the last person on earth that is an impossibility.

There is nothing stopping anyone from becoming wealthy, but like I said, if it were that easy everyone would be doing it.

[dezfan]

No one said it was easy, that's kind of the point.