It all depends

[Virgil Showlion]

Isn't a flat tax system supposed to be... flat? As in, non-progressive?

[Steady As She Goes]

I like It too, gdgyva!!!!
Now can you sell it to the rest of the populace?

[domeasingold]

You can't grow food in a city. People will steal it before it ripens.
Then we hire contractors to guard the mini farms.

The mayor of our fair metropolis was pushing vertical farming. They found that growing corn on the Willis Tower was more difficult than originally thought. Too much high level winds and too much moisture. Not to mention the mud dripping down the windows. Plus the cost of bringing everything up by freight elevator was prohibitive. So they moved all farming 4 blocks from downtown to2 and 3 story buildings, mostly the restaurants building where they harvest for that particular restaurant. Self sustaining co-ops!
This is a true story.
Since I live out 35 miles from Chicago we border on farm territory. The problem the last 50 years has been suburban sprawl. The land had become much more valuable to develop into new subdivisions. I currently live on a space that was cornfield 25 years ago. Will any of the events of the last couple of years change building and development habits from now on?
And how come nobody is whining about the one natural resource that is needed most for farming or housing developments? Water! Water! Water!

[Virgil Showlion]

And how come nobody is whining about the one natural resource that is needed most for farming or housing developments? Water! Water! Water!

Of course not. We Canucks make a mint piping it down to you guys. ;D

You're putting our kids through college.

[domeasingold]

No we are stealing fro you guys. When the spring thaw happens in CDN it runs into the Great Lakes. We pump it out of Lake Michigan. Then we sell it to the new homeowners for $125/mo.

[sangria]

I like your plan gdgyva, but even if we could get it through Congress and get the President to sign, I'm afraid the states and counties are going foul things up.

They line up with their hands out for whatever cut they can get. What the counties alone are banging us for in property tax is starting to make federal income tax look like small potatoes.














"p - o - t - a - t . . . . . . . . . . ."

[dumdeedoe]

ND domer don't let mid's brother John Birch propaganda rile you up to much. They(reverse conspiracy) are trying to attack entitlement programs like SS,Medicare and other age related programs. So just like on the conservative talk show programs they are attacking Baby Boomers on a national scale right now...

[Deleted]

Virgil

How about we call it a "progressive" flat tax then

A real flat tax again strikes the lower income harder than the higher income

Because as with the sales tax, they pay the same % out of a much smaller pie....

It is not perfect....and lots will bitch about it.....but it is the fairest thing i can come up with

But Sangria is right....the state and local governments will be problematic

Steady...sales is someone else's game.....

I am more of the idea and management type

[frankq]

"Do you think many will cry a river of tears that instead of 300-500 times the average workers salary, CEO's/owners make 10-15 times"

Owners bankroll the business. Owners bet the farm in most cases, to start and grow the business, and it's their farm, not the employee's. Owners carry the liabilities. Owners can pay themselves whatever the business can tolerate, unless we going to the Communist/Socialist business model.

[nicomachus]

I would like to see one or two states try a flat tax, guaranteed minimum-income plan along the lines that Friedman (and briefly, R. Nixon) was pushing in the late 60s early 70s. Then, if it works for those states after several years, we can look at expanding it to other states or federally.

[midwesterner (banned)]

Sounds like we have a few on this board they don't know what it is to be poor or have never had it financially hard at one point in there life. Not speaking to all, just those with little compassion in their hearts and the me, me, me attitude.

Uber capitalism is just as bad as communism if it gets out of control. Think about it.

[dumdeedoe]

I always thought a flat tax was a good idea because it left my savings alone,and only taxed me for what I would use.
But I think that it would be disastrous for the 47 million Americans that at present don't pay tax (or pay very little). If you take their once a year bonus(4-5k a year from their tax return) away and add a 17% or so deduction from their income. You would see a large switch of the tax burden from the mid/upper mid class to the lower/lower mid class.

Right now in the US the lower class(under 51k household income) has no tax burden and the upper class has a very low tax burden (15%)
But the mid/upper mid have a huge tax burden of up to 40% to make up for it..

Tax chart: www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.html

[Deleted]

Mid

You didnt state any names.....but

I come from a family of seven raised by an E6 in the Navy

We were not dirt poor...but ask anyone if it is easy raising that many kids on enlisted pay...my mom waitress'ed on occasion to buy milk & bread...dirt poor no....lower middle class....oh yeah

Most successful people i know have the same basic traits and characteristics....but the thing that is ALWAYS there is self motivation...and a burning desire for a better life for themselves and their family

I would be surprised if ANYONE on this board was born into a lavish lifestyle....people gravitate towards these type of boards to learn....people that have always had money already think they know everything

[Deleted]

Is "your company" a mega-company with several CEO's having yearly compensation packages in the multi-millions? Those are the companies I refer to. It is fairly easy for an individual to incorporate their business, even those that simply operate a "poop-scooper" service...you cannot compare apples to oranges. As far as raiding his "piggy bank"...just how big of a piggy bank was it and what was the construction material ? ok, so we know it wasn't *really* a "piggy bank", however euphemisms/metaphors/colloquialisms can mask/alter the reality of a situation, (although they certainly make for passionate and colorful speech). I'm not referring to "mom and pop" corporations down the street, I'm referring to the enormous, multi-million/billion dollar, usually multi-national ( better to avoid accountability/transparency) corporations.



Read more: notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=moneytalk&action=display&thread=3417&page=3#ixzz1EBQeKyYF

So when does a company go from a "mom & pop" organization, and cross over to mega evil corporation. Is there a size category? Is it about compensation for the officers? Is there a sales limit? Where does the line get drawn in the sand?

ok...at 100 million you are still okay, but at 150 million everyone turns suddenly evil and greedy.....i know you didnt say that, but that is the perception that is being put out there....

that is the problem that i see with these comments. A company is a company is a company. I dont care if their sales are 50k or 50 billion. The rules should be the same for all....ahhhh but there is the rub. The rules were NOT the same for all with the bailouts....

Forget that just for a moment....companies and corporations work for their owner or their board.

NOT FOR THE PUBLIC

What is in the best interest of the general public may be very detrimental to the company....so companies try to weigh their decisions against the two. When you own and run a company...you can make any decision you like. Just dont be surprised when the good of the people doesnt show up in the bottom line.

Back to the bailouts....i hate them. They go against everything that i know...and have learned. I would love to see the people that put this mess together in prison. Dont think it is going to happen...but it should.

[comokate]

So when does a company go from a "mom & pop" organization, and cross over to mega evil corporation. Is there a size category? Is it about compensation for the officers? Is there a sales limit? Where does the line get drawn in the sand?

ok...at 100 million you are still okay, but at 150 million everyone turns suddenly evil and greedy.....i know you didnt say that, but that is the perception that is being put out there....

Uh, no, there is "no perception that is being put out there" except, by you. I didn't say "evil corporation" and I was specific in making the distinction between a mom and pop business and a mega-corp.
I never mentioned the word "evil" either, but it's interesting it came to mind for you.
Personally I think it's more a matter of emotionally stunted, empty people trying to bolster their own lack of true self esteem with material objects obtained by trying, ever unsuccessfully, to fill their inner void. Laughably pathetic except for the fact it destroys the lives of others.


solari.com/blog/?p=2058 <---highly recommended reading

[neohguy]

From todays Consumer Metrics Institute. Can't post a link because it's a members report:
....But even with those caveats in mind, the above chart is clearly signaling that something is amiss with the consumer economy -- something that neither the BEA nor the BLS has yet reported. Our data suggests that their aggregate measures of the economy fail to capture share changes among the different socio-economic, age, gender, racial or cultural demographics. In effect, this may not be a rising tide -- but rather a selectively benevolent crane operator who is lifting favored boats back to sea.

Some external evidence of demographic divergences was observed within the February University of Michigan consumer sentiment data by Dave Rosenberg. Although the headline number of 75.1 beat expectations (and was the highest level since June), Dave noted that:

"all the gains in consumer confidence in the past month were concentrated in the high income segment ¯ soaring to 88.2 in February from 80.7, which is the best reading since December 2007. That is a sure sign of how the equity wealth effect has taken over, at least among the folks that own stocks. But sentiment among the lowest income group actually tumbled from 72.1 to 67.7, a three-month low, and that may reflect the unintended consequence of QE2, which was to send the prices of food and fuel sharply higher...."

[domeasingold]

So Kate,
Buying a new BMW is not recommended?

[midwesterner (banned)]

Talking about mega corporations, and what draws the line, I think is different for everyone. Behavior or direction the company is taking could be one thing, size, off shoring, contributing to elections, etc. There are many things that mega corporations do that are not in our best interests. Sure moms and pops businesses can do same things, but they are limited in funds to do the damage or influence as a mega corporation.

One thing I would personally vote of is allegiance to your nation. What I mean about that is as soon as a country off shores business operations in form or moving labor overseas, it's a form of disloyalty. Second off shoring and incorporating in another nation for tax purposes. In these two cases I would say you lose your rights to sell in USA. I see no problem with trading with other nations, but if the countries are causing havoc on local industries then tariffs on foreign goods should be there to keep a level playing field. If we want to keep a middle class some safety net measures need to take place.

My general feeling is when you incorporate, and I don't mean small businesses for liability reasons, I mean when a family company grows fast and then incorporates, it's usually taking it into a bad direction overall.

Maybe we are asking the wrong questions. Maybe instead of looking at the problems, we should be looking at what we want.

1. What sort of a nation do we want to be
2. What is important and part of our value system.
3. Do we except people living in poor conditions without food or health care as part of capitalism?
4. How far do we take social programs without losing ourselves to a communist system??

Just a few I can think of, but I think many here realize the pendulum has swung too far in one direction, and things are not right in Kansas anymore.

If we had a true vision of what we as a majority wanted our society to look like and be, then finding solutions are much easier and pointing out what has to change becomes much clearer.

[Deleted]

Were there poor and starving people in the 1880's yes
1910's yes
1940's yes
1970's yes

There have always been those that are
a. less fortunate
b. lazy
c. disenfranchised
d. perrenial bad luck
e. not able to help themselves
f. those that just dont give a damn

We still have the same ability to go from rags to riches in this nation. Damn...look at some of the people that have made it big....

But we have also become lazy....and reliant on others.

I have "some" compassion for those that tried...and failed. We have safety nets for those...and MOST should be able to regain employment during those times. But a lot of it is bad decision making also. When do we hold people accountable for their own bad decisions?

When do we say enough....and force them to sink or swim?

I have no problem with a hand up for people....but eventusally the hand outs have to end.

And no matter what programs you put in place....there will ALWAYS be poor and starving people.

[usaone]

Good post.

Our economy has never been perfect. The 1800's were a mess economically.

We had a depression in 1907. Everyone knows about the 1930's and the 1970's.

Its all cyclical.

Even Gold. ;D

[scaredshirtless]

Kate?

As you know your pitch on the bankruptcy changes took me back a bit.

And then today - I read this:
blogs.reuters.com/christopher-whalen/2011/02/14/revolution-reform-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/

You are dead right - nothing gets done for nothing. If I read this right - Wells Fargo would be a BIG benefactor because they hold so many seconds!

Speaking of Wells - they're creeping into the news lately. I've long considered them the worst for actually reporting what goes on inside. ie - biggest smoke screen.

I always thought they benefitted from the Buffet effect - since Berkshire is a big stock holder. (Smoke screens)

Maybe that will change?

[superintendent552]

The company I worked for is only surviving due to BRAC (Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission). They build and refit military bases. The other 2/3's of the construction work they once did is non existent at this time. If the military budget is cut that will open up another can of worms in respect to the economy and unemployment. Our government knows by spending money (it does not have) keeps millions of people employed. Our present day economy is a mess and I don't see a way out. We need the gov to cut spending. How do you do that without putting more people on the street?

I did not sign a contract with the government to spend non existent money on my behalf. Are the congress people personally on the hook for the money they spend? I don't see why I should be responsible for their debt through income tax. I am not allowed to print money from thin air and then spend money I don't have.

I don't want to hear this economy is the same it always has been with the exception of the great depression. Try being unemployed close to 60 with an education in this market and then tell me things are fine, there will always be the less fortunate people, less this or that, lazy. I said this before, I will never make the money I was making before I got laid off. I needed 6 more years and I was out, did not make it. Now what? Underemployment or unemployment? I did not cause this economic crises but I am sure caught up in it. I feel I have been robbed of a better future by our government and big business.

The paper tiger banksters making millions with nothing of theirs at risk is obscene. If they owned the company had skin in the game took the personal risk to succeed then make all the money in the world, and I say good for you.

I'll bet most of you that think things are good are a lot younger than me or still working steady jobs. My you always find that to be true.

[neohguy]

Good article from Reuters S_S. From the article:
....The amusing part is that even with the corrupt control over America’s governing apparatus, the largest banks still manage to screw things up. Consider a much overlooked example that is very germane to the mortgage mess, namely bankruptcy reform. To better enslave American consumers in perpetual debt and penury, the big banks changed the bankruptcy laws in 2005 to make it more difficult to discharge debts and thus lower credit losses. But just the opposite has occurred.
A paper to be published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York notes that the bankruptcy reform legislation had the effect of lowering default rates on credit cards and other types of unsecured debt, but boosted default rates on supposedly secured subprime mortgages. “Legal scholars and practitioners have long recognized how filing Chapter 7 and discharging unsecured debts can help avert foreclosure,” the paper notes. But all that the large banks have done is to shift the economic cost of default more heavily onto mortgage portfolios.

There is good reason to think that the large banks deliberately made the changes in the bankruptcy laws so that unsecured debts, which are typically retained in the banks’ portfolios, would see smaller losses. Mortgages, which are largely owned by investors and guaranteed by the federal government, are seeing far higher losses. If you think that such duplicity is beyond even the capabilities of the largest banks and the armies of lobbyists that serve them, think again.

“The banks negotiated a means by which they collect unsecured credit ahead of first mortgages and all mortgage losses go to the federal government,” notes a veteran attorney. “These losses will be funded by US taxpayers because the banks duped unsuspecting conservatives and liberals in Congress into thinking it is evil to let Bankruptcy Judges decide whether debtors can afford to pay their first mortgages.”....

[scaredshirtless]

Cool stuff huh?

Thanks for the help - kinda busy today but trying to contribute.

[scaredshirtless]

Wow! I just hit a 100 posts!!!

Woo hoo!!!

[frankq]

Feb 16, 2011 20:44:23 GMT -5 midwesterner (banned) said:

Sounds like we have a few on this board they don't know what it is to be poor or have never had it financially hard at one point in there life. Not speaking to all, just those with little compassion in their hearts and the me, me, me attitude.

Uber capitalism is just as bad as communism if it gets out of control. Think about it.

Mid you don't know shit about how anybody on this board grew up. You wouldn't have survived in my neighborhood back in the day, especially during the riots which occurred pretty much in front of my house when I was a kid. We didn't have much, but we were happy. So was everyone else in the neighborhood. That said, I would rather be where I am. I've earned it. You Communist business model types are the ones to be concerned about. Try telling a business owner you want to limit his pay but he is to still assume all of the risks and see how many businesses you grow and jobs you create with that strategy.

[frankq]

"My general feeling is when you incorporate, and I don't mean small businesses for liability reasons, I mean when a family company grows fast and then incorporates, it's usually taking it into a bad direction overall"

Really? Is that the only reason to form a corporation Mid? You obviously have no idea what it takes to run a business.

[dumdeedoe]

Super552 karma for u... You nailed it on the head. The feds are using their buying power to keep a 25% unemployment rate from happening... And are pretty clueless on how to stop it...
We as Americans have been/are being indoctrinated on how businesses are the great evil... When in reality our nation needs to cater to the business sector both large and small. We have to offer tax incentives to stop us from bleeding jobs overseas... We need to regulate trade to reduce our trade imbalance(which is bleeding money from our system) Stop over regulation and forced health care,,, lower business tax rates (the second highest in the world)... Increase tax liability on the rich (cap gains) and poor alike(stop 47 million from being on the no tax roll).... Will this happen? hell no,,, the SOB that tries to raise my taxes will get my boot up his A## Cause I needs my money and I am a great American.................

[comokate]

Henry Ford paid his workers 5 dollars a day in 1914. It was considered an outrageous amount of money at the time and made him fairly unpopular with other manufacturers of that time. He did it because he wanted loyal workers who valued their jobs, and he also felt that the “common” man should be paid a living wage. Not only did it not bankrupt his business, Ford Motor Company became one of the biggest manufacturing companies in history, and his home rivaled the palaces of Europe.
Recently this year, garment workers in India rioted and went on strike to increase their wages. They won, and their wages almost doubled. Yet in 2011, they still do not make what Ford workers made in 1914.
Expecting people in this country to be paid a wage they can actually live on, in a safe work environment, is PRO-American. I want to see the people in my community, state and nation prosper. We expect our food to be safe to eat. We expect the medicine we take to be safe and effective. We expect to walk down our streets and sleep in our homes without being attacked. We achieve what we expect in these areas, and others, by laws, regulations and holding those responsible, accountable. Not only can regulations and accountability exist within the framework of a Democracy, and a Capitalistic society, they improve the conditions of both.
Someone pointed out in this thread that there have always been:
“those that are
a. less fortunate
b. lazy
c. disenfranchised
d. perrenial bad luck
e. not able to help themselves
f. those that just don’t give a damn”

I would point out there have always been those that:
a. are manipulative
b. lack empathy for others
c. are reckless, impulsive
d. lie
e. have a disregard for rules, laws and social customs
f. exhibit violent and intimidating behavior and have trouble with controlling his/her impulses
g. neglect the needs of others

Historically most societies frowned on those behaviors as they are ultimately destructive not only to the individual that possesses them , but to the greater society around them. Those “bad apples” were dealt with in various ways, often harshly, to avoid their spoiling the entire bunch. In modern times this behavior has been categorized as being sociopathic, yet rather than “deal” with it, it has been , for the past few decades, increasingly rewarded. We are currently seeing the effects of this in our economies, our political systems, and increasingly, in interactions with each other.
Decent, civilized, human beings do not enjoy the distress of others and do their best to avoid being the cause of it. They do not want to see other human beings suffer, to lose their homes, to be hungry, to lack medical care. It doesn’t make them “commies”, it makes them mentally/emotionally healthy, compassionate human beings, and although those who lack the ability empathize with other human beings may find the terms confusing, the healthy populace of the world does not.

edited for spelling errors

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2011 14:01:58 GMT -5 midwesterner (banned) said:

That's quite the rant there mid. How about you paying 29 years into a 30 mortgage and then being told you just had another 10 years added before the house is yours because the younger mortgagees need your money to help them get a lower rate on their mortgage.

Absolutely wrong. You don't understand it's not the ones with the carrot dangling in front of them that are the problem, it's the one's dangling the carrot. I'm tired of hearing how these people that are mostly low education, little change of advancement and/or understanding of finances are the problem. A REAL BANK, would have not lent them the money in first place.

Why did they? Fractional Reserve banking with it being pushed from the top down feeding the bubble. If the game is profit, then if there is nothing to loose because of derivatives, and unless money from the debt based monetary system, then what's to stop bankers from lending to anyone and everyone.

Sound money system would have put the brakes on this before it even started. If we had sound money, let me tell you something, those banks would have been out of business fast because of the fact those people that got the loans would have not paid back and the consequences would have been felt instead of bailouts or write offs.

If I owned a restaurant and let all the bums come in and eat for free expecting them to pay me back someday when they get their life together, guess what, I'd be out of business fast.

You should really learn about this banking system and how it works before commenting on such matters. Your opinion is based on lack of understanding the nature of this very, very corrupt banking cartel and system in place.

I was using the 30 year mortgage statement as a metaphor in regards to social security if you followed the train of thought.... Bankers have been bankers since the invention of money. Some pay to the banker, some get paid from the banker, it's your choice. Going by your rants you're in the pay to the banker group. I did think it was humorous though, when you wrote that I should "learn" about the banking system and my lack of "understanding".