Under Bush US's 400 richest doubled their wealth

[RodISHI]

Ed it is a new day new deal for the Amish. we were out at Rod's sister's house last night. Her ex bought her a look a like fireplace. The case is wood (looks like a China put together). The heater is made in China. Nice little tag on the back that has the little horse and buggy logo, plus written on the tag "inspected by Amos."

Over four hundred daollars he paid for it. First day the fire light spinner took a dump.

 

[Bern80]

which is pretty much why we don't hear capitalistas crying about how they could invest their money for retirement into the market on their own these days, eh? Funny how that hindsight always kicks the shit out of your standard issue WSJ economic opinions, eh?

hey, lets GAMBLE with some retirement funds! THATS probably not a crazy emergency just waiting to blossom!

You silly bastards don't need vegas because your monkey is the stock exchange. And, like junkies, you are CONVINCED that everyone can win with just another quarter invested into your slot machine.

It's interesting you go on these sabaticals after one of your tantrums and return like the same old Shogun who has to spin, distort or just plain lie about other people positions to make your own point. Perhaps you need another reminder, an argument on the basis of a faulty premise is no argument at all.

Not even close to what I said. In fact I quite clearly stated in another post that their is risk involved. In case that needs to be spelled out for you, that means you could lose. Either people choose to accept the responsibility and consequences of that risk or they don't. I have no problem with social security as a form of retirement money, but there is no doubt that there is the possibility of far better return on your investment in the stock market (as well as the risk of loss) and I don't see the problem with giving people the option.

 

[Care4all]

which is pretty much why we don't hear capitalistas crying about how they could invest their money for retirement into the market on their own these days, eh? Funny how that hindsight always kicks the shit out of your standard issue WSJ economic opinions, eh?

hey, lets GAMBLE with some retirement funds! THATS probably not a crazy emergency just waiting to blossom!

You silly bastards don't need vegas because your monkey is the stock exchange. And, like junkies, you are CONVINCED that everyone can win with just another quarter invested into your slot machine.

It's interesting you go on these sabaticals after one of your tantrums and return like the same old Shogun who has to spin, distort or just plain lie about other people positions to make your own point. Perhaps you need another reminder, an argument on the basis of a faulty premise is no argument at all.

Not even close to what I said. In fact I quite clearly stated in another post that their is risk involved. In case that needs to be spelled out for you, that means you could lose. Either people choose to accept the responsibility and consequences of that risk or they don't. I have no problem with social security as a form of retirement money, but there is no doubt that there is the possibility of far better return on your investment in the stock market (as well as the risk of loss) and I don't see the problem with giving people the option.

The three 401k's I participated in there was no choice other than investing in the stock market with mutual funds if you wanted to get your company MATCH for retirement...

They came to us with a little wheel, telling us if you invested X amount in the lower interest fund then when you retire you will have 654,000 dollars and if you invest Y amount you will have $1,234,000 by the time you retire....you could do different scenarios on the wheel to figure out how much you wanted to have taken out of your paycheck every month....

The wheel thingy, NEVER SAID you would LOSE money.....NEVER....

The company i was working for, cut out their guaranteed pension plan for us, and said the 401k was it....take it of leave it...

 

[Truthmatters]

Timeline of the Great Depression


By 1929, the richest 1 percent will own 40 percent of the nation's wealth. The bottom 93 percent will have experienced a 4 percent drop in real disposable per-capita income between 1923 and 1929.


Over the decade, about 1,200 mergers will swallow up more than 6,000 previously independent companies; by 1929, only 200 corporations will control over half of all American industry.

 

[RodISHI]

which is pretty much why we don't hear capitalistas crying about how they could invest their money for retirement into the market on their own these days, eh? Funny how that hindsight always kicks the shit out of your standard issue WSJ economic opinions, eh?

hey, lets GAMBLE with some retirement funds! THATS probably not a crazy emergency just waiting to blossom!

You silly bastards don't need vegas because your monkey is the stock exchange. And, like junkies, you are CONVINCED that everyone can win with just another quarter invested into your slot machine.

It's interesting you go on these sabaticals after one of your tantrums and return like the same old Shogun who has to spin, distort or just plain lie about other people positions to make your own point. Perhaps you need another reminder, an argument on the basis of a faulty premise is no argument at all.

Not even close to what I said. In fact I quite clearly stated in another post that their is risk involved. In case that needs to be spelled out for you, that means you could lose. Either people choose to accept the responsibility and consequences of that risk or they don't. I have no problem with social security as a form of retirement money, but there is no doubt that there is the possibility of far better return on your investment in the stock market (as well as the risk of loss) and I don't see the problem with giving people the option.

The three 401k's I participated in there was no choice other than investing in the stock market with mutual funds if you wanted to get your company MATCH for retirement...

They came to us with a little wheel, telling us if you invested X amount in the lower interest fund then when you retire you will have 654,000 dollars and if you invest Y amount you will have $1,234,000 by the time you retire....you could do different scenarios on the wheel to figure out how much you wanted to have taken out of your paycheck every month....

The wheel thingy, NEVER SAID you would LOSE money.....NEVER....

The company i was working for, cut out their guaranteed pension plan for us, and said the 401k was it....take it of leave it...

That sounds about right Care.

 

[Skull Pilot]

which is why we need SS

you mean the government run Ponzi scheme that put madow to shame??

How come I can't take money from my employees, tell them it's for retirement and disability insurance, then use that money I take to pad the budget of my business? Why can't I then pay the retirement benefits from the money I take from future employees?

I'd end up in jail if I did that but it's not illegal for the government right?

 

[Chris]

which is why we need SS

you mean the government run Ponzi scheme that put madow to shame??

How come I can't take money from my employees, tell them it's for retirement and disability insurance, then use that money I take to pad the budget of my business? Why can't I then pay the retirement benefits from the money I take from future employees?

I'd end up in jail if I did that but it's not illegal for the government right?

Don't worry, Americans are getting so fat that most of them won't collect much social security.

The Twinkie will save America.

 

[Skull Pilot]

which is why we need SS

you mean the government run Ponzi scheme that put madow to shame??

How come I can't take money from my employees, tell them it's for retirement and disability insurance, then use that money I take to pad the budget of my business? Why can't I then pay the retirement benefits from the money I take from future employees?

I'd end up in jail if I did that but it's not illegal for the government right?

Don't worry, Americans are getting so fat that most of them won't collect much social security.

The Twinkie will save America.

Deep fry that twinkie and i might believe you

 

[American Horse]

Bloomberg.com: U.S.

Are you begining to get it?

Capital gains made up 63 percent of the richest 400 Americans’ adjusted gross income in 2006, or a combined $66.1 billion, according to the data. In all, the 400 wealthiest Americans reported a combined $105.3 billion of adjusted gross income in 2006, the most recent year for which the IRS has data.

Every bit of the data in this article supports the concept of cutting capital gains taxes with the U.S. Treasury yielding more revenues. The rates were lowered and suddenly the income of these 400 Americans increased, but so did the taxes they paid, even though the rates had gone from 22.9% to 15% with a realized effective rate of 17.2 percent (25% reduction) The "income" to the taxpayers had been earned over years, and we don't know how many. It could be any where between a couple to a couple of decades. Many others sold their capital assetts than these 400, but these published results only apply to them.

Remember, capital gains taxes are not paid until the asset is sold, and may have been held for many years.

“The big explosion in income for this group is clearly on the capital gains side, although there are also sharp increases in dividend and interest income,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research in Washington.

Once again this statement suggests that although the sellers of these capital assets had more (unearned) income, they also paid more taxes, which is a good thing for the U.S. Treasury. This benefit to the treasury was the main supporting argument for lowering the taxes: MORE TAX REVENUES! Not less.....even though the rates were lowered.

In addition, “they are realizing more of their gains due to the lower tax rate,” Baker said.

So, shazzam! Everybody wins! Even investors who sell their capital assetts, after taking all the risks. And in ordinary times the earnings have to go somewhere, like back into the economy to pay more wages and don't forget, land and real property are capital assetts too, and the sale of them open up new usages and opportunites for creating jobs and building public infrastructure in the most efficient way, when it's done by private developers, and not public agencies.

(from the Bloomberg article) "The data show that the population of the top 400 income- earners has fluctuated over the 15 years the agency has tracked it, according to an analysis by the Washington-based Tax Foundation, a research group. Some 3,305 different taxpayers have been included at least once on the list, the Tax Foundation said. Only 27 percent of those taxpayers have appeared more than once on the list, and only about 15 percent have been on it more than twice."

This suggests that this is an ever changing group membership, and that new members can logically only come from outside the group, meaning that earners are moving up into the group of capital asset sellers, staying a couple of years and moving on.

It seems to me that this situation supports lower capital gains taxes, and definitely not higher ones; unless we want to hurt people because of their perceived wealth.

 

[Shogun]

More money for WHOM? The LAST thing we need is any more economic polarization.

 

[American Horse]

More money for WHOM? The LAST thing we need is any more economic polarization.

More money for those who earn it and take the risks. the polarization comes from the likes of this whole thread which stated that: Under Bush US's 400 richest doubled their wealth when the title of the referenced article was: Richest Americans’ Income Doubled as Tax Rate Slashed. Wealth and income are two different things. To condemn wealth is to polarize.

They don't hide that money under their mattresses. One way or the other it goes back into the economy, as investments to promote other new or existing industries, or to hire goods and services. This is particulary important to those who are employed by small businesses, which comprise about 70% of the nations employent base.

I would wonder how many of the above critics are employed by or own small businesses, or are entrepreneurs. I could almost pick them out, and by the same token I could almost as accurately identify those who work for the government and educational sectors, and for large corporations.

 

[Skull Pilot]

More money for WHOM? The LAST thing we need is any more economic polarization.

More money for those who earn it and take the risks. the polarization come from the likes of this whole thread which stated that: Under Bush US's 400 richest doubled their wealth when the title of the referenced article was: Richest Americans’ Income Doubled as Tax Rate Slashed. Wealth and income are two different things. To condemn wealth is to polarize.

They don't hide that money under their mattresses. One way or the other it goes back into the economy, as investments to promote other new or existing industries, or to hire goods and services. This is particulary important to those who are employed by small businesses, which comprise about 70% of the nations employent base.

I would wonder how many of the above critics are employed by or own small businesses, or are entrepreneurs. I could almost pick them out, and by the same token I could almost as accurately identify those who work for the government and educational sectors, and for large corporations.

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

 

[Annie]

More money for WHOM? The LAST thing we need is any more economic polarization.

More money for those who earn it and take the risks. the polarization come from the likes of this whole thread which stated that: Under Bush US's 400 richest doubled their wealth when the title of the referenced article was: Richest Americans’ Income Doubled as Tax Rate Slashed. Wealth and income are two different things. To condemn wealth is to polarize.

They don't hide that money under their mattresses. One way or the other it goes back into the economy, as investments to promote other new or existing industries, or to hire goods and services. This is particulary important to those who are employed by small businesses, which comprise about 70% of the nations employent base.

I would wonder how many of the above critics are employed by or own small businesses, or are entrepreneurs. I could almost pick them out, and by the same token I could almost as accurately identify those who work for the government and educational sectors, and for large corporations.

I must agree. I'm trying to teach my 8th graders the opportunities and risks of the stock market. Seems like the best time to teach both. Their parents have already shared horrors, now seems the time to teach the possibilities. I'm hoping to get them in their trading groups within the next two to three weeks, so that we may return to WWI and beyond!

 

[American Horse]

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

Those who can ...do
Those who can't ....teach
Those who can't teach ....teach others to teach
Those who can't teach others to teach ....sell insurance

...Just an old "saw" and not intended to apply to any persons or groups at this forum

 

[Skull Pilot]

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

Those who can ...do
Those who can't ....teach
Those who can't teach ....teach others to teach
Those who can't teach others to teach ....sell insurance

...Just an old "saw" and not intended to apply to any persons or groups at this forum

having sold insurance at one point in my life, I'm not sure how to take that one.

 

[Annie]

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

Those who can ...do
Those who can't ....teach
Those who can't teach ....teach others to teach
Those who can't teach others to teach ....sell insurance

...Just an old "saw" and not intended to apply to any persons or groups at this forum

Well this is one teacher that has a 4.0 from University of Chicago in sociology and political science. A 4.0 in history from Elmhurst. A 4.0 MS in Ed. Admin from St. Francis.

I've held management position for AT&T, until I left to raise my children.

I was accepted to Northwestern Law, but chose a different path. So I think I can 'do', I choose to teach. Oh yeah, I sold insurance for awhile, won a trip too.

Are there teachers that couldn't cut it in other fields? Sure. But they had enough to get through Gen Ed and the rest. Some are better than others. Give me a person that wants to teach, has struggled themselves with academics, you've got the makings of a teacher that will help all of their kids excel.

 

[garyd]

Taxing capital gains at the same rate as income will certainly send such investments overseas tp lower tax areas which is most of the freaking world.

 

[American Horse]

I must agree. I'm trying to teach my 8th graders the opportunities and risks of the stock market. Seems like the best time to teach both. Their parents have already shared horrors, now seems the time to teach the possibilities. I'm hoping to get them in their trading groups within the next two to three weeks, so that we may return to WWI and beyond!

My above post was not intended to offend any teacher, college professor, or insurance agent, only the dregs from those realms.

A good place to encourage young people to develop their business skills and get inspiration is "Junior Achievement" in Junior and High School.

It is a noble thing to encourage the young to explore, and to find the value in the use of their talents. That is the future, as it was just after the depression. My own father went out every day for allmost all his adult life, and found a place to work and sell his services and talents usefully to those with "wealth".

 

[Skull Pilot]

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

Those who can ...do
Those who can't ....teach
Those who can't teach ....teach others to teach
Those who can't teach others to teach ....sell insurance

...Just an old "saw" and not intended to apply to any persons or groups at this forum

Well this is one teacher that has a 4.0 from University of Chicago in sociology and political science. A 4.0 in history from Elmhurst. A 4.0 MS in Ed. Admin from St. Francis.

I've held management position for AT&T, until I left to raise my children.

I was accepted to Northwestern Law, but chose a different path. So I think I can 'do', I choose to teach. Oh yeah, I sold insurance for awhile, won a trip too.

Are there teachers that couldn't cut it in other fields? Sure. But they had enough to get through Gen Ed and the rest. Some are better than others. Give me a person that wants to teach, has struggled themselves with academics, you've got the makings of a teacher that will help all of their kids excel.

maybe you teachers should learn how to take a joke and not be so defensive.

 

[American Horse]

"A" students work for "C" students and "B" students work for the government.

Those who can ...do
Those who can't ....teach
Those who can't teach ....teach others to teach
Those who can't teach others to teach ....sell insurance

...Just an old "saw" and not intended to apply to any persons or groups at this forum

having sold insurance at one point in my life, I'm not sure how to take that one.

The kind of insurance I'm referring to in the old saw is the kind that is sold on the street, or in congress, where the price is "buy it or else" I think.