For Jerk,

[JohnnyMack]

“Either cuts in spending or increases in taxes will be necessary to stabilize the fiscal situation,” Bernanke said in response to a question. “The Federal Reserve will not monetize the debt.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agmj05AcqWHo&refer=worldwide

That's good. And bad. Hopefully it'll be cuts in spending and not the latter.

[JLEW1818]

yep

he did promise no higher taxes! we shall see

[Crucifax Autumn]

I believe the promise was no higher taxes for people earning less than 200k a year, but yeah...we'll see.

[Curly Bill]

He also said he wasn't a Muslim, but now he's over there hangin with'em. ;)




What...






...who said that?

[OklahomaRed]

That's why I quitting one of my consulting jobs. Why make over $200K if it's all just going to get spent? Why work my ### off just to pay taxes? I'm joining the ranks of the under $200K club. If he goes lower, so will I. Why work? Heck, I'd must rather sit around and drink a cool one and let all of the Dems worry about where they are going to get their money?

What's funny, I know I'm not the only one doing this. :cool:

[yermom]

would you mind explaining the math on that to me?

[King Crimson]

i didn't see the phrase that used to believe the government but now am some kind of civil liberties Jeffersonian. in the last 100 days.

[OklahomaRed]

would you mind explaining the math on that to me?

No math. Just weighing my options. If I am going to pay a larger % of what I make to the government if I make over $200K a year, then I will quit one of my consulting jobs to keep my total annual income below $200K a year, or even lower. Why work 80 hours a week if I am going to just give a big % of it away? Perhaps if I make just enough to stay off welfare I can get one or two of my kids college educations for free? :D Maybe I should divorce my wife and let her keep the kids so they can get some more government money and hand out? :D Heck, if you can't beat em, join em? :rolleyes:

Why work myself into an early grave? Why not just sit around, drink some cold ones, hang out by the fishin' hole, get on some food stamps, some free healthcare, some free college for my kids, and relax.............. Ahhhhh.....Ain't life grand? :D

[JohnnyMack]

i didn't see the phrase that used to believe the government but now am some kind of civil liberties Jeffersonian. in the last 100 days.

Whaa?

[JLEW1818]

People who make over 200,000 are the ones actually giving jobs to people... if you tax the "owners" more... they are going to hire less people... causing more unemployment

that's about the most easy way to explain it... a freaking 4 year old can understand that. It's that damn simple. that simple .

[King Crimson]

Whaa?

lol. figure it out.

[Vaevictis]

People who make over 200,000 are the ones actually giving jobs to people... if you tax the "owners" more... they are going to hire less people... causing more unemployment

that's about the most easy way to explain it... a freaking 4 year old can understand that. It's that damn simple. that simple .

Yeah, that's one theory.

Feel free to explain how that theory explains the post-WWII economic boom despite >90% top marginal tax rates on the highest earners.

[Vaevictis]

That's why I quitting one of my consulting jobs. Why make over $200K if it's all just going to get spent? Why work my ### off just to pay taxes? I'm joining the ranks of the under $200K club. If he goes lower, so will I. Why work? Heck, I'd must rather sit around and drink a cool one and let all of the Dems worry about where they are going to get their money?

What's funny, I know I'm not the only one doing this. :cool:

No sweat, I bet there's a long list of people who'll be more than happy to take that job for you.

[Jello Biafra]

Yeah, that's one theory.

Feel free to explain how that theory explains the post-WWII economic boom despite >90% top marginal tax rates on the highest earners.

whu?

[JLEW1818]

Times are different now i guess. Got some greedy bastards in CEO offices... I don't think they care for people as much now.. compared to after the war.

[Vaevictis]

Cared? Heh.

My grandfather tells a story about how high tax rates informed decision making in his company (American Zinc). He was a VP in the 60's and 70's, and hence was around for board meetings from time to time.

One year, one of the executives asked for a substantial raise. The board members scoffed at him, and asked, "Okay, so we can give you this raise, of which 90 cents on the dollar will go to the government. Or, we can invest in depreciable assets which both generate a return and a tax break. Or, we can invest in more low and mid-level employees that will generate a return, and only maybe 25-30 cents on the dollar will go to the government. Which of these makes the best business sense?"

The executive didn't get his raise.

[JLEW1818]

but did we spend trillions of dollars then?..

[Vaevictis]

In that light, let me give you an alternate theory: High marginal tax rates can be good because they force executives to consider the long term.

If you can make your fortune in five years by selling out and going for high risk-high return investments, why wouldn't you?

On the other hand, if high tax rates in the top income tiers prevent you from making your fortune except over a period of many years, aren't you going to be motivated to think more towards the long-term results of your decisions?

[JLEW1818]

who knows whats going to happen.... prayer is about the only thing I can really do..

and if he does not fix anything in the next 3.75 years.. he needs to go. obviously.

[Vaevictis]

but did we spend trillions of dollars then?..

No, but you can't really compare a dollar today to a dollar then -- how much did the average person earn in a year? $3k-$4k?

I can tell you that we're not even close to our highest levels of spending as a proportion of GDP -- iirc, that easily goes to the WWII years.

[Vaevictis]

And for what it's worth, I'm not saying your theory is wrong -- or even that mine is right. I'm just saying that it's more complicated than you were admitting.

[JLEW1818]

the middle class will end up getting taxed for this eventually...if its not on their income, food and gas and everything will go up in price... some way or another, peoples lives won't be getting better.

[TUSooner]

i didn't see the phrase that used to believe the government but now am some kind of civil liberties Jeffersonian. in the last 100 days.

I admit I have professed agreement with things that I didn't really understand. (E.g., I voted for Ray Nagin. :O ) And I tend to agree with KC on many things. But even I need some help with that. :rolleyes: :D

[OklahomaRed]

No sweat, I bet there's a long list of people who'll be more than happy to take that job for you.

Yah. Right? Why would you want to work when you can get it for free? Must be an idiot who would rather work three jobs to try to get ahead while you look at the guy next to you and he ain't working at all and the government is taking care of him?

Telll me who is smarter in that scenario? :confused:

[Vaevictis]

Heh, you just keep flogging away at that straw man.

[soonerscuba]

People with $200k+ talent in the corporate world typically understand what a bracketed, progressive tax system is and how it affects your take home pay. Say what you will about the use of tax dollars, but you are hurting no one but yourself by taking lower paid gigs, and I assure you neither employers or the government care about your righteous indignation.

[GottaHavePride]

Dude, say I make $275,000 per year and have to give 40% to the government. That means I keep $165,000 per year. Now, if I drop down and make $200,000 per year and only have to give 30% to the gov't. that means I'm keeping $140,000 per year.

$165K > $140K. I'd rather have the extra $25K per year after taxes, but you go right ahead and give up $25K if you want.

[yermom]

but it's not even like that. it's more like the part after $200k is taxed more. so instead of being taxed 30% like the <$200k it would be 40% on the extra $75k

so we're talking like $140k + $45k instead of $192.5k (i have never heard increases proposed anywhere close to 10%)

it's certainly worth getting food stamps and living in Section 8 housing instead of actually working

[JLEW1818]

was drunk talking last night... sorry

[Vaevictis]

Let's have some fun, shall we?

Top marginal tax rates with respect to time:

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5732/historicalmarginaltaxra.jpg

Looking at the graph, you can see we actually are currently enjoying fairly low top marginal tax rates compared to the last 100 years or so. Of those years on the graph, 73 of them had a top marginal rate greater than the current one.

If I recall correctly, we still had hard working executives and consultants and doctors and lawyers and engineers and what have you busting hump from 1932-1986. But if you have data to the contrary, I'm all ears.

(We also had a respectable overall yearly growth rate in the range of 4% for this period, if you adjust for inflation.)

[Ike]

Let's have some fun, shall we?

Top marginal tax rates with respect to time:

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5732/historicalmarginaltaxra.jpg

Looking at the graph, you can see we actually are currently enjoying fairly low top marginal tax rates compared to the last 100 years or so. Of those years on the graph, 73 of them had a top marginal rate greater than the current one.

If I recall correctly, we still had hard working executives and consultants and doctors and lawyers and engineers and what have you busting hump from 1932-1986. But if you have data to the contrary, I'm all ears.

(We also had a respectable overall yearly growth rate in the range of 4% for this period, if you adjust for inflation.)

If one were to find a chart of GDP growth (or some other measure of the economy's "health") for the same period, and overlay it with that chart, I wonder how correlated the two charts would be.

My first guess is: Not at all.

[Crucifax Autumn]

So in other words, both sides of this debate are full of shat? lol

[Vaevictis]

Actually, if I'm reading him right, I think what he's implying is that he doesn't think there's any relation between top marginal tax rate and economic performance.

(in other words, he's calling shenanigans on the notion that lowering top marginal tax rate results in an increase in GDP, or that increasing the top marginal rate results in a decrease in GDP.)

[olevetonahill]

AS just a Poor Boy here
what Im callin Bullshat & cheese on
Is the Fact the Mother****er said He would NOT raise Taxes on anyone makin less than 200K

Yet he has raised and Intends to Raise Taxes on the very things that Po folk Buy :rolleyes:
kiss my ask :rolleyes:

[JohnnyMack]

i didn't see the phrase that used to believe the government but now am some kind of civil liberties Jeffersonian. in the last 100 days.

So just because I supported Obama in the election means I shouldn't hold him accountable for his decisions and that I'm going to love all his choices? Sorry but I'm not a party line hack who predictably falls in step.

I think the budget Obama dropped on us was as offensive as W's antics with The Patriot Act post 09/11. I will be the first to admit that I underestimated the severity of this economic crisis and had I been better educated about it I might have made a different decision as to where I threw my support.

[JLEW1818]

So in other words, both sides of this debate are full of shat? lol

pretty much.. libs think they know the way to solve things, republicans think they know the way...... in the end.. a middle ground might actually be the best.

[tommieharris91]

So just because I supported Obama in the election means I shouldn't hold him accountable for his decisions and that I'm going to love all his choices? Sorry but I'm not a party line hack who predictably falls in step.

I think the budget Obama dropped on us was as offensive as W's antics with The Patriot Act post 09/11. I will be the first to admit that I underestimated the severity of this economic crisis and had I been better educated about it I might have made a different decision as to where I threw my support.

I really don't think McCain-Palin would have been much better. McCain wanted bailouts, too. In the end, neither were good choices when it came to economics.

[Curly Bill]

had I been better educated about it I might have made a different decision as to where I threw my support.

Some of us tried. ;)

[Jerk]

Disclaimer: Guys, I am a pessimist at heart, a true believer in doom and gloom, and fantasizer of the real SHTF scenario.

We will not have inflation because the FED will FAIL. I know I have said we would in the past but I hereby change my position. They are simply too incompetent, no matter how much money they print.

10 year t note yields are about to go sky f***ing high, meaning so will mortgage rates, ARMs, and even car loans. That will be a nice 'coup de grace' for the so-called recovery.

If you're in stocks, I'd say to short the fkn phone book. Problem is, they can act irrational longer than you can stay solvent. This is a wealth destroying rally that has been ongoing since March. It is not sustainable.

We will have a bond market crash soon if Washington doesn't change its ways. The trillions of dollars Bush and Obama have borrowed have kept us out of a depression. But unless something changes (like the internet in the 1990's) we are going to pay the piper. Big time. Get out of debt, save cash, put some of it in gold in case my thesis is wrong.

Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct answer. Too much debt, not enough real GDP (real GDP would subtract whatever the government spent from money raised in the bond market)

We are screwed, and both parties are to blame.

Have a nice day.

[Jerk]

One more thing about inflation. We live in a global economy now and if anyone can tell me how wages can be coupled to price increases then maybe I will change my mind.

[Jerk]

You know what really flips my mind is that RIGHT NOW we have a dollar on the decline AND deflation.

A week dollar showed up first in rising energy prices despite the fact that there is no increase in demand.

We will be fine here in oklahoma. Watch what happens to California and the rust belt. It will be horrific.

If I was your portfolio manager, I'd recommend gold, lead, and long guns. But I'm just a dumbass truck driver.

[Vaevictis]

One more thing about inflation. We live in a global economy now and if anyone can tell me how wages can be coupled to price increases then maybe I will change my mind.

I'm not entirely sure I get what you're getting at with respect to "how wages can be coupled to price increases." Can you expand on that a bit?

If I'm getting your statement correctly, you're suggesting that because we have a global economy, it is possible for inflation to occur and wages not to follow. Am I interpreting this correctly?

[Crucifax Autumn]

I can honestly say I'm not sure what he's asking either!