# Class warfare?



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 11, 2012)

Robert Reich:



> To hear the media report it, President Obama is proposing a tax increase on wealthy Americans. That’s misleading at best. He’s proposing that everyone receive a continuation of the Bush tax cuts on the first $250,000 of their incomes. Any dollars they earn in excess of $250,000 will be taxed at the old Clinton-era rates.
> 
> Get it? Everyone is treated exactly the same. Everyone gets a one-year extension of the Bush tax cut on the first $250,000 of income. No “class warfare.”



http://robertreich.org/post/26903999855


----------



## wst3 (Jul 11, 2012)

Ah but Nick... where's the fun in that?

I am rapidly becoming so incredibly tired of this whole game. I have zero use for either the incumbent or the challenger, and I wish they'd either fire their PACs or just go away completely.

Not that I'm anywhere near the $250K cutoff, but I think it is a reasonable compromise, and I can't for the life of me understand why anyone is arguing about it. Maybe if I earned more I'd be more concerned? I don't know, I do know I paid my taxes without complaint when I was in the top bracket, and so did everyone else I knew. We weren't quite rich enough, I guess, to worry about hiding money. (It's probably more of an issue for folks in the lowest bracket, but they can't afford the lawyers and accountants required to properly hide income.)

We've always had a graduated tax system at the federal level - or at least for as long as I have been aware, and the top brackets used to be much worse.

And on top of all of that, aren't there more important issues to discuss?

I'm still trying to get my mind around the latest Executive Order, titled "Executive Order -- Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions"

It's some scary reading!

UGH!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 11, 2012)

> aren't there more important issues to discuss?



Well, yes and no.

Yes because nothing is going to happen anyway. And because it's only a relatively small part of the solution.

But the underlying problem of inequality really is worth discussing. We're in a depression because the vast majority of people don't have the spending power to get us out of it. And the main reason for that is that so much of the income has gone to the top.

A guy I know - Gary Reber, who at one point was the marketing person for Monster Cable - has an interesting take on it. He talks about "democratic capitalism" - basically shared ownership of the things that make money, which these days doesn't mean labor.

This is well worth reading even if you don't agree with everything he says (and I only agree with most of it). It's not a quick read, but he has some really interesting points that go well beyond the typical toilet politics we're forced to argue over and over and that you're so tired of (because the Republicans are crazy!  ).

http://www.widescreenreview.com/blog_detail.php?id=837


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 11, 2012)

Inequality is a serious issue, and the 2 minorities that represent us have turned a blind eye as they are concerned with power and wealth.

The Road of failure has been paved with white Liberal guilt, and the Evangelical infiltration of the right wing minority is equally ignorant.

I just returned from a Dry County in Kentucky where the United Church Of Christ has a minister who rallies his coffers in a grab for political control over the people by Having Vote No to alchohol sales in restaraunts. They will lose, but there's no difference from wealthy Liberals wanting to take care of the poor stupid peasants with others money, and the brainwashed minions who have God on their side.

I wish both of these freak shows would just disolve and leave their best ideas so the middle class working man can get on with life, free from these controlling minorities.

The simple answer to inequality is the middle class being left alone to regain their power and wealth, then simply boycott Banks or Corporations who pay sickening salaries to their CEOs and demand a return to the cost of living wages we once had.

Poor people have no power to do this as they live off of taxpayer dollars, but if the poor and middle class could unite, there's a story worth telling.
But weakening small businesses and creating an entitlement state is slavery, pure and simple, and that means politicians will control you.

Get rid of these 2 freak show minorities and send new freshmen in November, that's a good start.
Voting for the same wealthy Liberals and Conservatives is a vote against the middle class, any way you flip the coin...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 11, 2012)

Chim, read that article. I forgot to mention that Gary Reber is a political economist who ran for political office one time, not just "some guy."


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 11, 2012)

" Government should create financial incentives and tax provisions to reward American companies that bring manufacturing back to the United States from abroad, promote manufacturing investment, and incentivize more investment by foreign companies, all with the condition that the employees will share in the ownership benefits generated by the new capital formation projects. The result will be more broadened employee ownership and in-sourcing of jobs created by the new capital formation projects. "

This is pretty much what I have been saying for years. Nevadas Corporations take care of the public employees health care and pensions, not the people.
This also is why the Right to Work Laws are so successful and beneficial to the Unions as it incentivizes all to participate.

A prime example is the Culinary Unions ownership of large swaths of Carson Valley land, which adds more wealth to their 401k's and pensions.

I think Harry Reid is a dirtbag as he of all people knows that Nevada has a plan that caused an economic boom from 1984 to 2008.
The uncertainty we hear and see from these 2 freak shows in DC is what stiffles growth, and investment.
We have Asian, American and World Dubai standing around with hundreds of billions to invest here, but won't make a move until these asswipes are removed.

Great article, thanks.

Sorry I didn't read it as I figured it was a NYTimes copy/paste, I apologize for the incorrect assumption.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 11, 2012)

The basic line is "own or be owned."

That's really what we have today: a country run by people who make money by owning things. And unless you own things that make money, you're stuck, because most of the jobs that have gone overseas aren't coming back.

Gary has some interesting ideas about how to get there. I'm not sure I go along with every one of them, but I think his basic idea really is the solution.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 12, 2012)

It is a great reality dose. I realized this once we paid our house off and then were left with small monthly bills, only to see it's value drop by 60%, and now in 2012 it's still 145k less of the appraisal from 2006.
The good old American boycott has more power than many think. Just look at the Banks with their ATM bull shit, and they were balloon testing, not even having withdrawals, or re directed Social Security Direct Deposits.
Personally I admire those who earned and worked their way ahead with ingenious ideas, but Corporate Welfare was purchased and sold by both of these parties and I find that unforgivable. NAFTA was just a reminder of how these wealthy elites do as they wish, and the thought of public " service " to them is a badge of honor before they turn into lobbyists.
Read what former speajer Gephardt is doing right now. It's damn near treasonous and a complete " refinement " of his entire positions while he ran the DNC in DC.
And he was a highly regarded Liberal, father was a teamster from Local 600 in St. Louis where I grew up......
Lobbyhing is more harmful and corrupt than holding office and weilds much more control as politicians are purchased.


----------



## George Caplan (Jul 12, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jul 11 said:


> The basic line is "own or be owned."



wheres larry? because after the election i will own larrys ass. :lol:


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jul 12, 2012)

The French Revolution was class warfare.

A 5% increase in the tax rate for the wealthy in a nation with growing debt isn't warfare, a riot, or even a skirmish. It's just politics.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 12, 2012)

It is all political, just like the last year of wasted time these 2 fake parties of the status quo have pretended to play.
250k is what a married couple file jointly if they are contractors, or own a little flower shop, etc.
These asswipes don't even know what rich is, and it sickens me to see their faces, for as they speak, fecal matter curls from their lips.... =o


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jul 12, 2012)

250k in _earnings_ for a little flower shop? I'm in the wrong line of work!

They tax earnings after expenses, not gross revenue.

But I agree, there should be a higher bracket. At $250K year after year, you can pay a big mortgage, own a couple of nice cars, put your kids through school, take a yearly vacation and save for retirement. In other words, you've fully attained the American Dream without any corner cutting. But you're not buying jewels every other day, owning the biggest yacht in the harbor, or maintaining a crew of servants at your vacation homes. And you're certainly not buying controlling shares of stock, hosting $25K per plate dinners, or otherwise in the power game. In poker terms, you have "one white chip".

So yeah, at $250K you can afford to pay a bit more. At $2.5M per year, you can afford to pay a LOT more. At that level, you can afford the American dream 

One thing I'd like to see is a way to spread earnings out among multiple years. There's a big difference between a CEO who makes $2.5M for year after year and the person who gets a one time windfall, like a top athlete who gets the big contract followed by major injury. There's a big difference between $2.5M once in a lifetime and $2.5M year after year after year.

I equate it to sports. Let's say I'm in poor shape and jog a 16 minute mile. I can exercise a bit and do 12 minutes pretty easily. If I really put more time into it, I can get down to 8. Hey, not bad, I cut eight minutes off my time while working a day job! I'm twice as fast as I was!

You want to cut your time in half again? Get down to four minutes? You need to train full time and you still might never be able to do it. 

In the real, physical world, achievements get progressively harder and harder.

But money is the opposite. The more you have, the easier it is to make more. It's like giving Michael Phelps a head start and making Special Olympians lug weights. Crazy!

So yeah, the progressive brackets should continue well beyond $250K. Taxes should be easier on one-time earning than on steady earnings. And those who earn money while sleeping (capital gains) shouldn't be taxed less than people who actually work for their money.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2012)

> One thing I'd like to see is a way to spread earnings out among multiple years



That used to be in the code - income averaging. But it hasn't been for years, like maybe the '80s.

And I don't know what arguments there are against it. It makes total sense to me. If you get a severance kiss-off at an age when you're over 60, for example, is it fair that you be taxed at the full rate when nobody wants to hire you due to our obsession with youth? Or let's say you come out with something like a film that takes four years. All your income comes at once.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2012)

Yeah, it was the Tax Reform Act of 1986.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 12, 2012)

Believe it or not transactions were 15-20 USD after operating costs, and an average day is 100-120 transactions, Holidays are double.
But again it's location, location, location.
My friends wife sold the business after opening a 2nd store for 1.6 million back in 2004. He's got a Buchla 200E now the jergov....now she is a well paid choreographer for upcoming prodigy students in ballet and jazz.
I take home after costs 4 figures every week, and my better half has an agency that operates on cash as well as being a contractor.
We work our asses off and pay for SIIS insurance for each member or employee too.
Why should I have to give Harry Reid more money to waste on worthless Windmills or failed social programs...?

Let him and other millionaires fix their own bull shit, and raise these rates to 500k or a 1Mil. instead of knocking off folks who play by the rules and hustle so their kids can avoid the enslavement and indoctrination of failed public schools, or other " free " Government enslavement traps.
As simple and as silly as it sounds we only need a real leader who shows us the salaries of certain CEOs and have the people decide for themselves if they want to boycott their Banks or products.
I have had my fill of Big Government failures, and I don't mind the current safety nets as these people didn;t screw the citizens over, the Feds and their Big Bundlers on Wall Street did.
My beef is that the same theives and liars are still in the same positions and are above prosecution, so of course Corzine, Edwards and other wealthy Liberal and Conservative thieves can take any risks and steal as much as they want, as their Bros in DC got thier backs.
Im done with these clowns, they have raped us during the stimulus more than ever before in history of this nation, and the GOP screwed us for 8 years before that.
Their goal is to make Americans into slaves for their benefit. Grow the Federal Government, exempt all fraud, run failed programs w/o accountability........
I despise these mooches and their 200 Million USD per year friends, they must be boycotted, voted out or jailed, nothing else will satisfy me...


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 15, 2012)

Sorry for my absence, georgie-I was out in the fields witth the rest of my comrades, working on the collective farm, taking occasional breaks to hang former members of the elite ruling class and re-read Das Kapital.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 15, 2012)

chimuelo @ Thu Jul 12 said:


> Believe it or not transactions were 15-20 USD after operating costs, and an average day is 100-120 transactions, Holidays are double.
> But again it's location, location, location.
> My friends wife sold the business after opening a 2nd store for 1.6 million back in 2004. He's got a Buchla 200E now the jergov....now she is a well paid choreographer for upcoming prodigy students in ballet and jazz.
> I take home after costs 4 figures every week, and my better half has an agency that operates on cash as well as being a contractor.
> ...



+1.

Yeah!!

The more I learn about "liberal" politics and "conservative" politics with a dispassionate eye, the more I realize that both sides are attempting to skew the "masses" to one form of slavery or another. The liberal wants man to be slave to the government and the conservative-- well just a slave :lol: .

What kills me is that most people can't seem to see that it doesn't have to be one or the other.

This "letting Bush tax cuts" expire on people making more than $250,000/year is pure political hype. It doesn't matter. Not like that minor tax income on 1% of the population is going to make up for Obama's trillion dollar deficits.

All this talk of "fairness". I don't get it. When has life ever been "fair"? Not like any political party is going to be "fair" or bring about "fairness". I'd rather they just focus on stamping out brutality. But if they did that, then of course governments would have to give up their rights to "justice" which in this society is just an excuse to brutalize.

Maybe then if we had just laws could there actually be a level playing field. But this talk of "fairness" is just another ploy to get people to subscribe to communist ideals. The mistaken idea that we're all some how "equals". Ha! Walk by a bum on the street. You think he's equal? You could put him in a mansion with $10,000 spending money a month and he'd still be a bum! So we're not equal. Never will be. We're not the same, some will rise, some will fall, it's all pretty unfair. And God help us if there is ever another communist regime that tries to make us all equal and make life "fair". We've all seen where that leads.
_
Some are more equal than others_.....Animal Farm. Best quote ever. So glad I read that in high school. Because it's exactly what happens when some political force tries to make us all "equals" and sells us on "fairness". Those doing the equaling end up squashing us all down, because the only thing that makes us equal is eventualyl ending up 6ft under. I guess we're pretty equal then! But that's no way to lead a life.

Here's to us all being unequal and life being unfair and may we thrive in all our inequality for eternity. o-[][]-o


----------



## José Herring (Jul 15, 2012)

As an aside, do we cripple an Olympic athlete just because he's a swifter runner than 99.9% of the population? I mean it would be "fair" since why should he be faster than the rest of us? We should make him "equal" and cut off his left pinky toe and slow him down by a few seconds so that we can "all" compete in the Olympics. That would be fair.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 15, 2012)

josejherring @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> As an aside, do we cripple an Olympic athlete just because he's a swifter runner than 99.9% of the population? I mean it would be "fair" since why should he be faster than the rest of us? We should make him "equal" and cut off his left pinky toe and slow him down by a few seconds so that we can "all" compete in the Olympics. That would be fair.



Funny this was mentioned. I once was almost dragged into an argument with someone who said that people who get paid for their "natural talent" like athletes, are part of the economic problem, because they didn't "earn" that money. It was just dumped in their lap because they could run fast, or people with musical "talent" (I hate that word) write music. It was then I realized those kinds of people are useless to discuss with, because they will never understand what I went through studying music, and they still think that their job at McDonald's (or their welfare because they're too good to work at McDonald's) is society's fault.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 15, 2012)

Jose-though the playing field has become demonstrably more level, it was inarguably unequal for centuries. The fact that a disproportionate number of the poor and unemployed in this country are people of color,(and single mothers, a whole 'nother topic) for example, gives one two logical options-1. People of color are naturally less capable than white people, or 2. The various inequities will take decades to redress. Obiously, I'm in the second camp.

Programs like Affirmative Action, for example, are not fair-but they are an attempt to deal with long standing inequities by artificially creating an African American middle class. The thing is-that worked in some ways-to an extent, it accomplished that objective.

I'm certainly not saying that all of the policies of the Great Society were helpful or empowering-indeed, some were abject failures and made people more dependent. However, they were an attempt to deal with what is a very real problem of long standing cultural inequities and apartheid. It's just not logical to say that the playing field has always been level-it obviously hasn't. It's equally absurd to think the field can be leveled in a few decades. Cyclical poverty doesn't work like that. Education continues to be a major issue. Drugs. Violence in the inner cities. The playing field on the impoverished side is littered with crack vials.

I don't pretend to have all the answers, or even most of them. I DO think the questions are less cut and dried than the way you present them.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 15, 2012)

BopEuph @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> josejherring @ Sun Jul 15 said:
> 
> 
> > As an aside, do we cripple an Olympic athlete just because he's a swifter runner than 99.9% of the population? I mean it would be "fair" since why should he be faster than the rest of us? We should make him "equal" and cut off his left pinky toe and slow him down by a few seconds so that we can "all" compete in the Olympics. That would be fair.
> ...



Yeah, I've pretty much run into this attitude my whole life. One person even told me, "you're so lucky that you get paid to do something you love". Had to bite my tongue. Didn't want to cause an argument. Like luck has anything to do with it. :roll:


----------



## rgames (Jul 15, 2012)

The "Class Warfare" argument is a manufactured distraction. The sad truth is that any change to personal income taxes will have only a small effect on the country's fiscal well being. There's not enough there to make a difference.

So why all the political hype about it?

Answer: the corporations are the entities that really own the government. So they'll gladly manufacture these us vs. them debates to distract people from the real issue: the corporations are hoarding most of the wealth, not individuals. They don't care if it's democrat or republican, they only care that people pick a side so that they can control the debate and divert attention from themselves.

There's too much money in corporate coffers, not individual bank accounts. So who really cares about personal income tax rates? Change them. Sure. Or not. Doesn't matter.

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 15, 2012)

rgames @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> The "Class Warfare" argument is a manufactured distraction. The sad truth is that any change to personal income taxes will have only a small effect on the country's fiscal well being. There's not enough there to make a difference.
> 
> So why all the political hype about it?
> 
> ...



I agree with most of this, but that having been said, the issue is still amazingly polarizing.

Case in point-me. I cannot for the life of me understand how the rich have sold the lower middle class the idea that taxing them a bit more will undermine the American Dream. There must be a lot of Horatio Alger fantasists out there.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 16, 2012)

It's not just the extra $500 billion additional deficits the Bush tax cuts for the rich will add. This tax issue is at the tip of a very serious iceberg. The policy debate is about whether to make up the deficit by cutting social spending.

So this really is class warfare. The Republican party - the party of people who make money by owning things - is trying to increase the income inequality we have even more.

This issue *should* be polarizing!


----------



## George Caplan (Jul 16, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> Sorry for my absence, georgie-I was out in the fields witth the rest of my comrades, working on the collective farm, taking occasional breaks to hang former members of the elite ruling class and re-read Das Kapital.



all good. i dont like it when youre away for too long larry. i miss the uptown new york brand of socialism. carry on boys. this is fantastic reading. :D


----------



## rgames (Jul 16, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> I agree with most of this, but that having been said, the issue is still amazingly polarizing.
> 
> Case in point-me. I cannot for the life of me understand how the rich have sold the lower middle class the idea that taxing them a bit more will undermine the American Dream. There must be a lot of Horatio Alger fantasists out there.


It's mostly emotional, so nobody can win the debate, so it's polarizing and the debate carries on ad nauseum. That's precisely what both parties want.

That allows the real wealth hoarders to sit in the shadows while thinking "Thank goodness they're not looking over here!" The democrats and republicans (who are mostly owned by the real wealth hoarders) don't actually care whose side you're on. They only care that you pick one or the other so that they can distract people from the real issue.

They create the polarization. It ensures that the real power brokers remain hidden from the public eye.

Also, people get confused between what's right and what's the best use of time and political capital. While it might be "right" to change the individual tax structure (debatable, but it doesn't matter), it's a waste of time because it won't solve any problems.

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 16, 2012)

Richard, you're repeating what you said. Meanwhile I just explained why this isn't just a waste of political capital - it's at the center of the national debate about inequality right now.

Should the Democrats allow these tax cuts to be extended and then the deficit made up by cutting social spending? That's what the Republicans want to do, whether or not they spell that out clearly.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2012)

Ok, that said, do you object to taxing the wealthy slightly more, Richard? As a sop to the left, if nothing else. I ask this because it sure seems the Repubs, led by Grover Norquist, are ready to take this nuclear. I'm unsure how that advances the country.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jul 16, 2012)

josejherring @ Sun Jul 15 said:


> As an aside, do we cripple an Olympic athlete just because he's a swifter runner than 99.9% of the population? I mean it would be "fair" since why should he be faster than the rest of us? We should make him "equal" and cut off his left pinky toe and slow him down by a few seconds so that we can "all" compete in the Olympics. That would be fair.



Jose,

You've taken the exact opposite lesson from what physical competition tells us.

I'm 54. I swim competitively. Holding a day job I swim about five hours a week. Two hours per week are coached. At a recent meet, I swam the short course 100m breaststroke in 1:33.16. The world record in that event was 55.61 by Cameron van der Burgh of South Africa. The guy probably swam 28 hours per week, coached, plus weight training, video analysis, etc. And for all that, the guy is only 68% faster than me. Looking at it the other way around, I'm 60% as fast as the fastest guy in the world at my best event.

Now let's look at how many hours I work per week compared to, say, a descendent of John D. Rockefeller. Apparently, "what have you done for me lately?" doesn't apply to families of great wealth. With the Estate Tax, they pay a lower tax rate than I do, and with capital gain tax, they pay a lower percentage of tax while sitting on their cans than I do with real work.

Which one of us is getting his "toe clipped?"

So, at 54 with a bit of training, I can be 60% as fast the fastest guy on the planet. Yet I'm lucky if I have one millionth of the net worth of the richest man.

One simply can't compare the natural leveling of sports performance to the inherent divergence of economic performance.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 16, 2012)

Rockefellars are wealthy Liberals, so I really doubt they want to tax themselves.
This is why this bull shit of taxing the wealthy, is only meant to get support from the poor and lower middle class, stupid enough into believeing the rich will somehow be paying more.
They are protected by the laws they purchased, and their offshore accounts. Reid, Pelosi, Kerry, Romney and Bush won't pay jack shit and any hard working American taxpayer knows this.
Laws must be changed, and loopholes closed. But after 2 years of a Super Liberal majority that promised to repeal Citizens United, and clean up fraud, and make the tax system fair, it's safe to assume they take orders from a 3rd unseen party with members in key positions of the DNC and GOP.
So what ends up happening......?
The Middle Class gets screwed and the Sheep will cheer on this phony get the rich guy phallacy, and guys like us will see less money, which will further drive down demand.

Inequality is an issue we can fix, but not by voting in these wealthy Liberals and Evangelical Ass Kissers.

I actually think there's a little hope left for real change, but it sure wasn't Obama and the wealthy Liberal majority, and it sure wasn't the Conservative Super majority in the 2000-2004 session.
These dirtbags are the problem, and have no solutions other than to maintain their powerful positions, and the status quo.

The only positive revenue I see is the fake Moodys credit rating that sold billions in bonds, and the fact that the Treasury collects a hefty 72% of the proceeds from the worlds largest insurer AIG. We actually sold a chink of it to China for 6.8 billion dollars which was a steal. Before that the Treasury had 79%, Goldman Sachs, and Duetsch Bank had percentages as well.
So bailing out the Banks was brilliant, especially if you aren't prosecuted and can take risks with investors money, lose it, and get more taxpayer money. Great scam.

Corzine got away with murder, yet we are so worried about Jamie Dimon.
Anyone see the slant here for buddies of the administration....?

Now tell me how these wealthy Liberals are any different than the Koch Brothers.


----------



## rgames (Jul 16, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jul 16 said:


> Ok, that said, do you object to taxing the wealthy slightly more, Richard?


Not at all. 

But it is a waste of time. If you're going to go to battle, why not fight a battle that will make a difference? Is it really worth it to waste political capital on something that will have such a small effect?

The top 10% of income earners already pay about 45% of federal taxes (75% of federal income taxes). Corporations, who have a LOT more money, account for something like 8%.

Does it really make sense to go after those who have less money and already pay 6 times the amount of those who make a lot more money?

Methinks not. Unless, of course, you're one of the corporations. Which brings us right back on point - as long as we're debating the personal income tax, we're ignoring the corporate taxes. Which is exactly the way the system is designed to work.

So, yes. Let's all keep posting links to our favorite talking heads. But don't kid yourselves - you're all pawns of the power players! 

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2012)

So, yes. Let's all keep posting links to our favorite talking heads. But don't kid yourselves - you're all pawns of the power players! 

rgames[/quote]

Ummm..."you're"?


----------



## rgames (Jul 16, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jul 16 said:


> > So, yes. Let's all keep posting links to our favorite talking heads. But don't kid yourselves - you're all pawns of the power players!
> >
> > rgames
> 
> ...



OK, yeah, not everyone. But those who are will remain Nickless. I mean nameless...! 

Seriously, though, I'm not saying taxing rich people won't have an effect. The point is that there are MUCH better ways to solve the country's financial problems.

The country has decided that it wants to spend a lot of government dollars. You ain't gonna cover those bills with taxes on individuals. 

The Titanic is sinking and the crew are trying to fix a clogged toilet.... priorities, people!

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2012)

Why is it impossible to view a graduated tax structure(something we've had for a long time) as one of many issues, rather than the only one and therefor a distraction from the bigger issues? No one is suggesting that raising taxes slightly on the wealthy will solve our debt problems-but why, when that issue is raised, are you trying to divert that discussion into a different one? The larger issues of national debt certainly deserve their own thread.

There are really no "one size fits all" scenarios for fixing the larger problems. Social services WILL have to be modified and cut and revenues WILL have to rise. No one is going to be able to take ANYTHING off the table-yet that's exactly what the Emperor of the United States, Grover Norquist, has demanded via a pledge signed in the blood of Republican Congresspeople-that they take taxation off the table....and they signed it.

That posturing is absurd and obstructionist.


----------



## rgames (Jul 16, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jul 16 said:


> That posturing is absurd and obstructionist.


I'm not obstructing anything - I already said go ahead and fight the battle for changes in individual income taxes. And if you win, you'll have solved a tiny percentage of the problem.

I never said don't do it. I said it's not a good use of time and political capital.

If there is any diversion it's onto the debate on class warfare and taxes on rich people and away from solutions that really have substantive impact. You hear everyone talking about "fair share" and "the 1%" but how many times have you heard people talk about corporate taxes? Almost never. Given that corporate taxes have the potential to make a much larger impact, don't you think that focus is out of whack? So which is the diversion?

Again, I'm not obstructing anything. Go for it. Raise taxes on rich people. Then re-visit this thread in five years when you see that we're still in a terrible financial mess.

Just allow me the pleasure of saying "I told you so." 

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2012)

rgames @ Mon Jul 16 said:


> NYC Composer @ Mon Jul 16 said:
> 
> 
> > That posturing is absurd and obstructionist.
> ...



You misunderstood me. I was talking about the Grover Norquist mandate being obstructionist, not you-unless, of course, you are actually Grover Norquist  

As to the last, you're still not responding to what I said. Please re-read. I think we should raise the taxes on rich people AND do a whole lot of other crap. That's what I wrote. Go look. I agree-taxing the rich alone wouldn't solve a thing. That doesn't mean it can't be a small part of the solution.


----------



## rgames (Jul 16, 2012)

OK - gotcha. Yes, do them both.

But focus on the corporations 

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2012)

If it had to be either/or, no question. It doesn't.


----------



## Gusfmm (Jul 17, 2012)

Richard,

I definitely agree that there is no single nor simple solution or course of action. I hope you realize, though, that 99% of corporations are public entities responding to market forces and whose sole and only goal is to increase stakeholder value. So in the end, focusing on corporations entails impacting their capacity to increase that stakeholder value, and thus will always carry the risk of driving corporate profitability decisions based on adjusting their payroll (workforce) size as they may need to. In the end, this is always the case, it has always been. Whereas taxing high-networth individuals doesn't mean affecting the financial viability to the corporate entity per se, but targeting those stakeholders more extensively benefiting from the corporation profitability.

The risk associated with the former is that the majority of that "workforce" is not high-networth individuals, but workers who can (and will) be affected by the taxing conditions impossed on the corporation. Whereas in the later case, the risk for the majority (workforce) is much lower, as high-networth individuals tend to also have much better capacity to diversify themselves and not depend on a single source of income.



footnote- this is all considerably reduced to rough, basic terms to try to simply represent the idea, not trying to dumb down the concepts.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 17, 2012)

I despise the divisive race tactics the Liberals use, and even on themselves as according to Axelrod Hillary and Bill are haters of Negroes. Our children do not need to see adults, especially world leaders acting with such disdain for the process, but most people don;t care what kids think as they are engulfed with their re election and crusade of maintaing the powerful positions they are being so handsomely rewarded for.
Having siad that, I do believe Obama is going to finally start to shame the super wealthy and corrupt so bad that they will start trying to make roads back to appear as patriotic or humane. THose who already give their fair share and also donate are over half of the 2% the Liberals targetting, which just happens to be themselves in many examples.
It's all about the money as the Welfare people have excellent insurance. I saw my X Wifes MRIs and Cat Scans and even my insurance requires authorization. The AFL-CIO takes good care of their members even if they are losing membership dues and are raising Pension contributions and Dues money. One old timer had testecular Cancer and they flew him to UCLA and he didn't come back until the disease had gone into remission and the operation ( lost a nut ) was successful. We won;t get that kind of Health Care from the 2700 page bull shit that Andy Stern wrote for the Super Majority who never took the time to read it. They simply accepted stimulus money and favors, and even were told thier seniors could have special treatment from Ben Nelson in Nebraska just to get his vote. It was truly a criminal attempt at taking over another indusrtry that simply required these elites to fix what they themselves destroyed by accepting special interest and campaign money.

But I know so many people, myself included pulling double shifts and hustling to make ends meet, so I really think American are ready to hear the truth and bite the bullet, we already lost half of our equity and didn't riot, watched food and gas double. So lets just have a little old fashion faith that the wealthy, even the Liberals and Conservatives who Bank offshore and invest wisely in China, will remember who pays their salaries, and really come together after Obama wins in 2012, but will face a GOP dominated Congress and Senate.

This is where Hillary and Bill have experience, and even some new GOP evil racist Tea Partiers, 2 black ones too, but I guess they hate Eskimos or something, will fight for the common man since the rich are fine, and the poor really have great insurance, and free cash for staying home. It's like a free prison where they can sell drugs, work out, make babies for more money, eat Porterhouse while I have Tuna.

It's all good, in the end we will win, or by the grace of our ancestors remove these lying cock suckers like we did with King George.
Once they're gone we can buy their books where they describe the inner scams and laws they sold while leaving the middle Class to fight for itself.
As it always does.........

Have Faith My Brothers, America shall rise, and our kids will be fine, especially if we cut back the military and show the world we no longer wish to place our kids in wars where Saudis, Kuwaitis and other Arabs should be fighting for.
We can produce the energy here at home and downsize the military.
Robert Riech is a paid for blogger who has turned into a Whinoceros, but he did a great job cutting the Pentagon down, and closing bases that we dont need.
Let the EU and others who lived under our protective umbrella do as they wish.
The Polish seem more grateful that any European nation IMHO, Turkey too.
Besides, Russia doesn;t want to take over Europe, they make a fortune from their Oil sales. So let's come back home.
Maybe then there will be enough money to actually teach our kids another language in school. Europeans speak 2 and 3 languages and personally embarrass me as I feel like a dumb Yank.

But they'll still need a translator for Jive like June Cleaver in the movie Airport, so we still have an edge there.....\

Peace.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

> If there is any diversion it's onto the debate on class warfare and taxes on rich people and away from solutions that really have substantive impact. You hear everyone talking about "fair share" and "the 1%" but how many times have you heard people talk about corporate taxes? Almost never. Given that corporate taxes have the potential to make a much larger impact, don't you think that focus is out of whack? So which is the diversion?



What you and I think other people here are missing is that the income inequality in this country is what led to the crash. After working more hours and the sending women out to make a second income in order to keep up, people borrowed. That crashed.

I've posted many times what I think the short-term answer is to solve the fiscal crisis: massive stimulus.

But the underlying problem, the longer-term issue, is the inequality. Talking about fair share and 1% is absolutely right on, and it's what we should be talking about. Our survival depends on it.

One of the answers is in that article I linked a few days ago, which Chim read: more widespread ownership of things that make money. Employee stock ownership, profit-sharing, etc. I'd rather see that happen than have corporations avoid taxes by paying their CEO cronies even more money to build more mini-mansions and create another housing bubble.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 17, 2012)

> Social services WILL have to be modified and cut and revenues WILL have to rise.



Remember, the national debt is not the pressing concern, and the way to deal with it is by having a thriving economy so it's a smaller percentage of GDP.

That's a big number one.

But second, I disagree that we'll have to "modify" social services. That's not the way to reduce the deficit, it's the way to ruin the country and turn it into a nation of ghettos with a few gated communities housing white guys who look like Mitt Romney.

The biggest issue is rising healthcare costs. That's what's causing the debt to rise.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 17, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jul 18 said:


> > Social services WILL have to be modified and cut and revenues WILL have to rise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To a great degree,The U.S. already IS the country you're describing.

I agree that the cost of healthcare is the biggest issue-but Medicaid, Medicare and welfare fraud need to be addressed. Actually, EVERYTHING has to be addressed. The rich need to pay a little more, we need to consolidate agencies for social services to cut waste and redundancy, we need single payer (but are most likely not going to get it), we need to cut inefficient social programs on a case by case basis (is it doing it's job?). We need a WPA style infrastructure jobs program and job training program. We need to retain the cuts to the military and cut further(but not veterans benefits, I hope). We need to repatriate corporate profits and incentivize corporations to invest here and hire here.We need to do the same for small business-although the argument about a small raise in taxes for over 250k is ludicrous. Change the number slightly, maybe, but of COURSE it should be done, along with a whole lot of other things-like changing the capital gains tax to reflect a graduated rate for the wealthy. THAT'S a place where tax inequality can be addressed.

I am obviously not suggesting we remove the social safety net for the poorest among us, as you know-but really, this is a situation where we have to both raise revenue and cut spending to get ahead. There will be some pain everywhere, and this is not a good time for knee-jerk ideology. I am ALWAYS on the side of protecting the most disadvantaged, but that's not to say there aren't things that can't be made better, or at least the same and cheaper.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 19, 2012)

Well here's a concept. My decades old Walgreens sells fresher bread, eggs and milk cheaper than the grocery store, so I get scripts for my neighbor and everynow and then my own too. THe Pharmacy went from 16 people and 24/7 down to 10 people and 15 hours open, while the store is 24/7.
The employees got together with management and agreed to try this and also were going to get pay raises based on the difference.
It was a gamble, but they had a nation wide 12.5% profit for shareholers, many employees, and a 14% profit here at my store.
THe upside is the employees have a stake in the game and are highly motivated and keep seeing pay raises, the downside is that employees were laid off.

No matter which way you look at it, profit is a serious motivator.
The Stimulus actually did a good job of keeping public Unions and their pensions alive, staving off Stockton style bancrupcies, but also many corporations are showing record profits on their balance sheets.
We are doing things more efficiently with less revenue as the stimulus was not given to the private sector, but still had an effect on the thier balance sheets.
Perhaps Krugman was right and we needed more, but I believe a portion of it was mis spent by career politicians taking care of their wealthy sponsors and friends.

It's taking longer to recover as there are so many unforseen variables, but extended unemployment and food stamps are keeping many markets in the black as in 2009 they were all goiing from 24/7 to 16-17 hours, etc.

Nevada makes recipients proove their financial status every 6 months which shows they are keeping track of their bank statements, soc. number popping up at a job while collecting, etc.

I am starting to see houses which were filled with people not making payments, which sadly caused another false bubble in housing as houses were still occupied and falsely kept prices higher, but foreign investments were responsible for 40% of new home sales and previous short sales. 

So if you ask me, cutting defense covers the entitlements, safety nets are a small continued form of stimulus, and the housing market has finally bottomed out, which sadly dropped our value another 7500 USD, but it's nothing but up now. The failed keeping people in their homes actually kept all home sales at a slightly higher rate which helped in the PPTax revenues, etc.

As a last resort, Nevada can pass a 2 year emergency law where state taxes can be enacted for an additional source of income to the proceeds collected from gaming and conventions. Looks like we won;t have to resort to that now.

Nevada was hit the hardest, but choose to avoid austerity measures which would never work in Europe, much less in urban areas in the USA, and it survived the states worst recession.

So I look at states like Wisconsin, Ohio, California and Nevada as good examples of how to weather the storm.
In all honesty I didn't think California would survive, but it isn't even in the top 7 States for highest per capita debt for it's citizens.
It's main problem is the future of unfunded pensions, and the nasty tactic of eminant domain as bad as it is, seems to be a short term bandaid until the economy starts to boom.

I must give credit to the politicians for extending benefits and medicaid programs as they were necessary, and unpopular for many who dont use them, but I see things differently than a whiny tax paying guy who works at a dead end job , but remains employed.

I give credit to the local politicians and people who are willing to get involved in these school/training, for benefits programs that are great for the above 45 class as they are now becoming card dealers, which has to suck, but pays an average of 800-1000 a week in hot spots, and 600-700 in places where the dead come to gamble.

If you ask me the Government and people worked together and came out looking pretty good. I just don't think these DC elites understand anything outside of their own districts. My Aunt lives in Sausalito and praises Nancy Pelosi as a hero for womens causes and local programs. She says the old gal can go anywhere in Marin county, or Napa where the vineyards we helped her build are, and she is praised as a Queen. I think she's a little whacky but a nice portion of stimulus money landed there and has seemed to have a big help as their unemployment rate is the lowest for major urban areas in CA.

I have faith in 2013, I just want this bull shit campaign to end, and let Obama finish the job he started, otherwise we'll have Romney getting credit for health care, and see Government employee lay offs in record numbers, as he is running on a platform of American austerity.
We only need to find other places for Government employees to work, not just send them packing. Many are returning veterans from the first Gulf War and more recent adventures. So what if the USPS loses money, privatize their pensions like the AFL-CIO does. Just need some smart folks with experience in adminstration and managenmen, not a CEO looking at costs.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 19, 2012)

Larry, we agree fundamentally, but I disagree that we need to cut social services and everything has to be looked at. I mean sure, absolutely, let's get rid of fraud and waste. Why not.

But that's all tiny stuff. The big fish is healthcare expenses - and by the way, Medicare is the solution, not the problem (to quote Robert Reich).

Speaking of which, he wrote another great blog post today about what it really takes to make the country competitive:

http://robertreich.org/post/27527895909

Education.


----------



## George Caplan (Jul 19, 2012)

i love it when people with very little money always rant on about how people with a lot of money should be taxed more. love it. totally love it. 

love it when i hear people with a lot of money rant on about how they think people with no money should sterilized. 

keep the tax ones coming. fantastic reading. :lol:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 19, 2012)

Yeah, but that really isn't the point, George. It has to do with survival of the country.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 28, 2012)

george would be a lot more interesting if he had something to contribute other than his expressions of amusement at the opinons and predicaments of others.

If he would offer his opinions about how to progress as a nation...wait. Nah. That would be...adding something, rather than taking something. Not really his style.

Oh, and george, your assumption that anyone who gives a crap about the indigent has "very litttle money" is baloney.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 28, 2012)

Chim-I think your last post was the most positive one I've ever read from you.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 30, 2012)

I guess I always enjoy seeing people helping people instead of wealthy liars in DC pretending that they know what's best for us.
When you have skin in the game and take a risk, you will see it through regardless.
Where politicians consistently fail is they have no skin in the game, and throw money at something and walk away in hopes it works out....Never does.


----------



## George Caplan (Jul 30, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Sat Jul 28 said:


> george would be a lot more interesting if he had something to contribute other than his expressions of amusement at the opinons and predicaments of others.
> 
> If he would offer his opinions about how to progress as a nation...wait. Nah. That would be...adding something, rather than taking something. Not really his style.
> 
> Oh, and george, your assumption that anyone who gives a crap about the indigent has "very litttle money" is baloney.



larry larry larry!

no one wants hear other peoples opinions on how to progress the nation. although they might want to consider how to keep the population from any further growth. why do you think people are leaving the uk?


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 30, 2012)

George Caplan @ Mon Jul 30 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sat Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > george would be a lot more interesting if he had something to contribute other than his expressions of amusement at the opinons and predicaments of others.
> ...



Untrue. This is exactly the place where people put their opinions forward for discussion and debate. What it shouldn't be is a sneering snarkfest.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 30, 2012)

I want to hear people's opinions on how to progress the nation.

What I don't want to hear is the same stupid right-wing lunatic (aka mainstream Republican) arguments repeated over and over.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 30, 2012)

I do, if they are put forth as opinions open for debate rather than sneering proclamations.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 30, 2012)

Love chatting about solutions I have seen that I know work, and love it when others can share similar incidents. 

But at the end of the day we have power locally, once these guys get out of protesting reach to DC they split off into 2 gangs. Sponsors are rewarded with legislative favors, Cash is secured to ensure their stay in office, then the gang mantallity / party loyalty comes, then after that 3 1/2 year process it's time to Pole Dance for the Middle Class.
Right now I can at least enjoy watching Romney and Obama pretend they are for the Middle Class. But I know who their bosses are, but will still go and vote in case God comes down from above and makes this process actually democratic and honest for once. Citizens United was created to prevent any Holy intervention, unless the Vatican wants to kick in 20 Million anonymously.

Funny how Jesus was a Socialist ( Bernie Sanders ) and came and kicked out the money lenders ( Goldman Sachs ) and then was crucified by Pontius Pilate and the real rulers. ( Federal Reserve )

Cheers, 
and let's blame the Poor, the Rich and the Middle Class for all of our failures. These are the lessons our leaders teach our children, and then if that doesn't seem to catch on, we can use race as another great teaching method for the kids.

These are great days my friends. If this process ever really becomes honest we won't have anyone worth denegrading....


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 30, 2012)

Just out of curiosity, Jim-are places like Binion's and the Golden Nugget where 'the dead come to gamble'?


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 30, 2012)

:lol: 
There are even worse places where a security guard is your sound man, and after a soundcheck he locks up the mixer in Plexiglass so we can't adjust the mix, but we have our ways.
These kind of joints are awful and we call the FOH guys Sargeant Sound, or SoundCop.
Vacated Village ( Vacation Village ) was notorius for the dead, and also the torturing of live performers.
The Waittail Cocktresses were so massive you could hear their nylons rubbing together as they walked.
But Binions and the Nugget are full of local degenerate gamblers and shills.
Thankfully the last few years I have done mostly conventions and private functions. The same money but half of the time.
But still, the Biker bars and Dives are the best gigs just to improvise and cut loose after an evening of entertaining the elites and tourists.

If you ever make it to Vegas, check out the Dive Bars. Great jams for old timers, ala Allman Brothers, Blues, R & B, etc. All the players come after their monotonous gigs so they can drink for free, check out drunk chicks, and yes have a cigarette or joint as we are still free here in Nevada. 
You dont smoke, no problem, there are many dead joints that try and get non smokers in there but nobody wants the Soviet lifestyle when they come to Vegas. Thats for NAMM, AES, and other Coastal Bloomberg style gigs....

CiaoMein


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 30, 2012)

Sounds like some fun, those after-jams.

Nobody without a name is working live for any sort of decent bread in Manhattan. it's some sad shite.

My times in Vegas were always gambling ventures until one year when I went to NAB. Massive convention, but not much for musicians. I had thought NAMM, where I went for about 20 years, was a big convention before that. I turned down gigs as a demonstrator to be a tourist. I loved checking out the new stuff at winter NAMM, but after my best friend, the general manager of Hosa, died a few years ago-it's been a little painful to go. He lived in Orange, and I'd hang out for the week.

Anyway, if I ever come to Vegas again, I'm calling YOU!


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 30, 2012)

Please pm me, I'll show what the USA was like before the 911 crisis stole our freedoms, well everywhere except here at the TSA ( Thousands Standing Around ).

FWIW I lived in Orange, Harbor and Katella actually, and worked the Red Onions, Bobby McGees, and with CIndy Wood of Polydor ( blonde in apocolypse now with the handguns ), she was stroking me for freebies but took my wife out shopping on some guys credit card, with promises of playing Hefners Mansion West, after 1 year of Hollywood scams I left and never looked back, but at least we were free back then, no cops, no trafiic really in '82 either. 
But I met so many lying bastards there, like the guy who was the step son of the guy whose voice came over the intercom in Rhoda, and all sorts of overly detailed nonsense, I had to leave.
So many dudes driving 200k cars and living in crappy apartments......Amazing.
NAMM was also amazing then with babes everywhere, beer, people jamming like Herbie, Miles, ELP, you name it.
Now you get Jordan Rudess play a 16 bar demo with tons of effects at Eric P's booth if your lucky. And the Drum Gauntlet is unbearable to walk through.

Sorry for the OT here, but Class warfare isn't being bought by the people this time, excpet the ones where the liberals are promising more money for a vote....
When the Liberals actually get out their checkbooks and write a check for 5 % more of their enormous wealth, I might buy it, but until then it's just more shuck and jive from a Party who has recieved more money from Goldman Sachs than any other time in history. I read the donations that are by law have to be reported. But Citizens United, could be Conservatice from China for all I know.
So this get the rich guy shit just dont hold water for the people who actually pay attention.

Peace Out......last set in 5..............

Edit: I am skipping the last set, I just tip the Bartender, and waitress 5 bucks each from band members. Afterall it's midnight, Food and Beverage is 9 to 5. It's like giving an underpaid public servant in New Orleans a twenty dollar bill to get in the front of the line as they bounce at night theyre so underpaid....


----------



## paulcole (Jul 31, 2012)

chimuelo @ Mon Jul 30 said:


> Funny how Jesus was a Socialist ( Bernie Sanders ) and came and kicked out the money lenders ( Goldman Sachs ) and then was crucified by Pontius Pilate and the real rulers. ( Federal Reserve )




Not only funny, but a wonderful irony that Pontius Pilate was born in Scotland.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 31, 2012)

The trouble with Scotland is..........That it's full of Scots.

Patrick McGoughan as Edward the Longshanks in Braveheat
United Artists 1995


----------

