More class warfare with this "corporate jet" nonsense

[CrusaderFrank]

Hardly.

A "marxist" is what a Republican calls someone who is smarter than they are.

Name calling is really all you have left.

But let me ask you a question...

Which is more important, that the polluting Koch brothers get a bigger yacht, or that children get an education and healthcare?

Yes, Chris, you are point tank in the Liberal Intellectual Elite Third Shock Army.

The Koch brother have less than NOTHING to do with my Healthcare and education.

You are a useful idiot because you don't even realize you're spewing Marxists talking points. That's how total the control is over what you think are your "thoughts"

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

You, Sir, are a fucking moron and that's probably an insult to many proud morons.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hardly.

A "marxist" is what a Republican calls someone who is smarter than they are.

Name calling is really all you have left.

But let me ask you a question...

Which is more important, that the polluting Koch brothers get a bigger yacht, or that children get an education and healthcare?

Yes, Chris, you are point tank in the Liberal Intellectual Elite Third Shock Army.

The Koch brother have less than NOTHING to do with my Healthcare and education.

You are a useful idiot because you don't even realize you're spewing Marxists talking points. That's how total the control is over what you think are your "thoughts"

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

Koch Bros --> Tea Party --> Lower Taxes ---> School taxes ---> Education ---> Stupid people like Chris post on the Internet.

See the problem?

 

[shintao]

Hardly.

A "marxist" is what a Republican calls someone who is smarter than they are.

Name calling is really all you have left.

But let me ask you a question...

Which is more important, that the polluting Koch brothers get a bigger yacht, or that children get an education and healthcare?

Yes, Chris, you are point tank in the Liberal Intellectual Elite Third Shock Army.

The Koch brother have less than NOTHING to do with my Healthcare and education.

You are a useful idiot because you don't even realize you're spewing Marxists talking points. That's how total the control is over what you think are your "thoughts"

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

Stopping the two or four party's is impossible. America needs a socialist workers union to gain power, and that also maybe impossible. People in general are self-centered, and don't worry about consequences until it is to late. Imagine these idiots parroting Marxist talking points in disdain, as the world collapses around them in the hands of corporatism and capitalism. I expect all social programs to either end or come to a severe reduction, with an infusion of foreigners taking predominate positions in America. Look for the corporate store in your future.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, Chris, you are point tank in the Liberal Intellectual Elite Third Shock Army.

The Koch brother have less than NOTHING to do with my Healthcare and education.

You are a useful idiot because you don't even realize you're spewing Marxists talking points. That's how total the control is over what you think are your "thoughts"

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

Stopping the two or four party's is impossible. America needs a socialist workers union to gain power, and that also maybe impossible. People in general are self-centered, and don't worry about consequences until it is to late. Imagine these idiots parroting Marxist talking points in disdain, as the world collapses around them in the hands of corporatism and capitalism. I expect all social programs to either end or come to a severe reduction, with an infusion of foreigners taking predominate positions in America. Look for the corporate store in your future.

Progressive really are American Palestinians, they do not have American values

 

[Kuros]

Actually, two-thirds of our economy is driven by consumer spending.
And those Capital Gains are larger when wages are held down as they have been for over thirty years in Real Dollars. Flat wages=larger profits=larger capital gains.
Now notice this economy is struggling because the consumer class doesn't have the expendable income to contribute towards the economy, which is a fact.

And the fact that 400 people control HALF the wealth in America.

Welcome to the Republican dream...Plutocracy.

How do you think this happened? Take someone like Bill Gates. Did he create something we all felt we had to have? Did we do whatever it took to get the latest thing he came out with? Were we willing to mortgage our homes, use credit cards with outrageous interest rates, generally do whatever it took to get his latest? WE throw money at people like him then we blame them for controlling more that their share of the wealth. We need to take a good look at ourselves before we blame the wealthy. How often have we discarded perfectly good products because we had to have the latest? How many of us NEED the latest and fastest computers to log onto facebook or surf the internet? We continue to throw our money at these people then claim we are entitled to the money they have earned and they are now EVIL for taking the money we throw at them. Why? They have given us a way of life we seem to love and are willing to do anything necessary to buy what they offer, then claim they are now the evil rich for making us happy. It seems some here are suggesting the wealth of the country is owned collectively are they also suggesting the intellectual wealth our country seems to possess is also owned collectively? The people that create these wonderful things, that make our lives so nice, are not entitled to profit from them? If that's the case we may soon see the end of the creative inventors that have given us all these things we can't seem to live without. Money is the greatest motivator ever and the reason this country became great is we allowed people to profit from their creations and become wealthy. I guess some would like to set back and do nothing and still profit from the wealthy.

I can see why those would like to assert that all manners of acquiring wealth bring value would point to Bill Gates as an exemplar. Bill Gates is a undeniably a creator, and has added wealth to our economy. The same cannot be said for many of the denizens of Wall Street, particularly investment bankers and private equity barons.

Look, for every Warren Buffet out there, an example of the noble rich who earn great wealth, spend modestly, and donate generously, there is a Stephen Schwarzman.

Schwarzman is a private equity baron. An economist article before the bubble explores the problem with private equity.

It strips companies of assets and flips them for a fast buck. It loads them up with dangerous amounts of debt, to suck out capital for its investors. It pays scant attention to employees and suppliers. Its greedy partners avoid the tax that others have to pay. If the markets turn, the volume of condemnation will only increase.

And after the bubble . . .

Imagine the derision when funds stop making money even as their partners take home large salaries on the basis of past achievements; when private-equity-owned companies default on debts, leaving insurers and pension funds saddled with the losses; when workers are put on to the street because of desperate cost-cutting or bankruptcies.

As it is private equity is a time bomb.

You may recall a front-page New York Times story from last October about Simmons Bedding Company. The 133-year-old Wisconsin firm was entering Chapter 11 bankruptcy, having been bought and sold by private-equity companies four times since 1986. The private-equity owners sucked out capital from a perfectly viable operating company and loaded it up with debt so that they could extract more money; when it collapsed under the weight, they took it into bankruptcy. Altogether, the private-equity owners made an estimated $750 million in profits, while the company’s debt went from $164 million in 1991 to more than $1.3 billion in 2009. In the bankruptcy, bondholders alone will lose some $575 million, and more than a thousand workers have already lost their jobs.

What happened to Simmons has happened to hundreds of other companies, and worse is yet to come.

It is blissful to assume that everyone who makes money in America is adding to the economy. But as the Great Short and the economic crisis revealed, that is a complete myth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the fact that 400 people control HALF the wealth in America.

Welcome to the Republican dream...Plutocracy.

How do you think this happened? Take someone like Bill Gates. Did he create something we all felt we had to have? Did we do whatever it took to get the latest thing he came out with? Were we willing to mortgage our homes, use credit cards with outrageous interest rates, generally do whatever it took to get his latest? WE throw money at people like him then we blame them for controlling more that their share of the wealth. We need to take a good look at ourselves before we blame the wealthy. How often have we discarded perfectly good products because we had to have the latest? How many of us NEED the latest and fastest computers to log onto facebook or surf the internet? We continue to throw our money at these people then claim we are entitled to the money they have earned and they are now EVIL for taking the money we throw at them. Why? They have given us a way of life we seem to love and are willing to do anything necessary to buy what they offer, then claim they are now the evil rich for making us happy. It seems some here are suggesting the wealth of the country is owned collectively are they also suggesting the intellectual wealth our country seems to possess is also owned collectively? The people that create these wonderful things, that make our lives so nice, are not entitled to profit from them? If that's the case we may soon see the end of the creative inventors that have given us all these things we can't seem to live without. Money is the greatest motivator ever and the reason this country became great is we allowed people to profit from their creations and become wealthy. I guess some would like to set back and do nothing and still profit from the wealthy.

I can see why those would like to assert that all manners of acquiring wealth bring value would point to Bill Gates as an exemplar. Bill Gates is a undeniably a creator, and has added wealth to our economy. The same cannot be said for many of the denizens of Wall Street, particularly investment bankers and private equity barons.

Look, for every Warren Buffet out there, an example of the noble rich who earn great wealth, spend modestly, and donate generously, there is a Stephen Schwarzman.

Schwarzman is a private equity baron. An economist article before the bubble explores the problem with private equity.



And after the bubble . . .

Imagine the derision when funds stop making money even as their partners take home large salaries on the basis of past achievements; when private-equity-owned companies default on debts, leaving insurers and pension funds saddled with the losses; when workers are put on to the street because of desperate cost-cutting or bankruptcies.

As it is private equity is a time bomb.

You may recall a front-page New York Times story from last October about Simmons Bedding Company. The 133-year-old Wisconsin firm was entering Chapter 11 bankruptcy, having been bought and sold by private-equity companies four times since 1986. The private-equity owners sucked out capital from a perfectly viable operating company and loaded it up with debt so that they could extract more money; when it collapsed under the weight, they took it into bankruptcy. Altogether, the private-equity owners made an estimated $750 million in profits, while the company’s debt went from $164 million in 1991 to more than $1.3 billion in 2009. In the bankruptcy, bondholders alone will lose some $575 million, and more than a thousand workers have already lost their jobs.

What happened to Simmons has happened to hundreds of other companies, and worse is yet to come.

It is blissful to assume that everyone who makes money in America is adding to the economy. But as the Great Short and the economic crisis revealed, that is a complete myth.

Warren Buffett? He pays the least in taxes humanly possibly including gifting all his wealth to a Charitable Trust.

You complain about Simmons but what what to say about GM, Chrysler, Fannie and Freddie? I'm all ears

 

[Kuros]

How do you think this happened? Take someone like Bill Gates. Did he create something we all felt we had to have? Did we do whatever it took to get the latest thing he came out with? Were we willing to mortgage our homes, use credit cards with outrageous interest rates, generally do whatever it took to get his latest? WE throw money at people like him then we blame them for controlling more that their share of the wealth. We need to take a good look at ourselves before we blame the wealthy. How often have we discarded perfectly good products because we had to have the latest? How many of us NEED the latest and fastest computers to log onto facebook or surf the internet? We continue to throw our money at these people then claim we are entitled to the money they have earned and they are now EVIL for taking the money we throw at them. Why? They have given us a way of life we seem to love and are willing to do anything necessary to buy what they offer, then claim they are now the evil rich for making us happy. It seems some here are suggesting the wealth of the country is owned collectively are they also suggesting the intellectual wealth our country seems to possess is also owned collectively? The people that create these wonderful things, that make our lives so nice, are not entitled to profit from them? If that's the case we may soon see the end of the creative inventors that have given us all these things we can't seem to live without. Money is the greatest motivator ever and the reason this country became great is we allowed people to profit from their creations and become wealthy. I guess some would like to set back and do nothing and still profit from the wealthy.

I can see why those would like to assert that all manners of acquiring wealth bring value would point to Bill Gates as an exemplar. Bill Gates is a undeniably a creator, and has added wealth to our economy. The same cannot be said for many of the denizens of Wall Street, particularly investment bankers and private equity barons.

Look, for every Warren Buffet out there, an example of the noble rich who earn great wealth, spend modestly, and donate generously, there is a Stephen Schwarzman.

Schwarzman is a private equity baron. An economist article before the bubble explores the problem with private equity.



And after the bubble . . .



As it is private equity is a time bomb.

You may recall a front-page New York Times story from last October about Simmons Bedding Company. The 133-year-old Wisconsin firm was entering Chapter 11 bankruptcy, having been bought and sold by private-equity companies four times since 1986. The private-equity owners sucked out capital from a perfectly viable operating company and loaded it up with debt so that they could extract more money; when it collapsed under the weight, they took it into bankruptcy. Altogether, the private-equity owners made an estimated $750 million in profits, while the company’s debt went from $164 million in 1991 to more than $1.3 billion in 2009. In the bankruptcy, bondholders alone will lose some $575 million, and more than a thousand workers have already lost their jobs.

What happened to Simmons has happened to hundreds of other companies, and worse is yet to come.

It is blissful to assume that everyone who makes money in America is adding to the economy. But as the Great Short and the economic crisis revealed, that is a complete myth.

Warren Buffett? He pays the least in taxes humanly possibly including gifting all his wealth to a Charitable Trust.

You complain about Simmons but what what to say about GM, Chrysler, Fannie and Freddie? I'm all ears

Yes, Warren Buffet pays too little in taxes, as he's readily willing to admit. But I'm holding him out as an investor who added value to the economy.

All I'm asking is you accept the following premise: not all pursuit of wealth creates an equivalent amount of economic growth. Many on Wall Street plundered the state. I think the Tea Party agrees, which is why they opposed TARP. Investment bankers were enabled to plunder the state because of mortgage securitization. Mortgage securitization has been gov't subsidized for years under GSEs, such as Fannie and Freddie. Congress and the Treasury have rightfully begun to wind down the mission of Fannie and Freddie, because the Housing-Industrial Complex is at the center of the economic meltdown.

I also opposed the GM and Chrysler bailouts, which were absurd Democrat interest-group handouts (to unions specifically). They should've been left to Chapter 11 bankruptcy, where GM and Chrysler could have reoriented the union contracts.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I can see why those would like to assert that all manners of acquiring wealth bring value would point to Bill Gates as an exemplar. Bill Gates is a undeniably a creator, and has added wealth to our economy. The same cannot be said for many of the denizens of Wall Street, particularly investment bankers and private equity barons.

Look, for every Warren Buffet out there, an example of the noble rich who earn great wealth, spend modestly, and donate generously, there is a Stephen Schwarzman.

Schwarzman is a private equity baron. An economist article before the bubble explores the problem with private equity.



And after the bubble . . .



As it is private equity is a time bomb.



It is blissful to assume that everyone who makes money in America is adding to the economy. But as the Great Short and the economic crisis revealed, that is a complete myth.

Warren Buffett? He pays the least in taxes humanly possibly including gifting all his wealth to a Charitable Trust.

You complain about Simmons but what what to say about GM, Chrysler, Fannie and Freddie? I'm all ears

Yes, Warren Buffet pays too little in taxes, as he's readily willing to admit. But I'm holding him out as an investor who added value to the economy.

All I'm asking is you accept the following premise: not all pursuit of wealth creates an equivalent amount of economic growth. Many on Wall Street plundered the state. I think the Tea Party agrees, which is why they opposed TARP. Investment bankers were enabled to plunder the state because of mortgage securitization. Mortgage securitization has been gov't subsidized for years under GSEs, such as Fannie and Freddie. Congress and the Treasury have rightfully begun to wind down the mission of Fannie and Freddie, because the Housing-Industrial Complex is at the center of the economic meltdown.

I also opposed the GM and Chrysler bailouts, which were absurd Democrat interest-group handouts (to unions specifically). They should've been left to Chapter 11 bankruptcy, where GM and Chrysler could have reoriented the union contracts.

I agree with a lot of it, but Warren Buffett has been a tax avoidance machine his entire career; many of BRK deals are structure as stock swaps to avoid taxes. He's the picture under the dictionary "Limosine Liberal"

The GSE need to die, immediately.

The problem with "Wall Street" is that the de facto governmental guarantee -- well, in some cases, Bear and Lehmann, not so much

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 'class warfare' has intensified since the election of RR in 1980. Break the political power of the corporations and that of their lackeys and stooges.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The 'class warfare' has intensified since the election of RR in 1980. Break the political power of the corporations and that of their lackeys and stooges.

Are you still pretending to be a Republican?

 

[xsited1]

When will the phony rhetoric stop?

If somebody already posted a connection to the failed Yacht tax of 1990, forgive me. Too many pages to read. This is from 1992:

President Bush (1st Bush, that is), in his budget proposals, asked Congress to repeal the 10 percent luxury tax on yachts priced at more than $100,000 (and also on private planes that cost more than $250,000). The repeal, which Congress is likely to approve, would be retroactive to Feb. 1.

Since the tax took effect in January 1990, hundreds of builders of large and small boats have spoken of it as a stake driven into the heart of an industry already suffering from the recession, tighter bank rules on financing and fallout from the gulf war.

In the last two years, about 100 builders of luxury boats -- recreational craft costing more than $100,000 -- cut their operations severely and laid off thousands of workers. Some builders filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code.

The Corporate Jet Tax, a Rerun of the Yacht Luxury Tax - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

 

[Toro]

When will the phony rhetoric stop?

What are we talking about?

 

[Chris]

Yes, Chris, you are point tank in the Liberal Intellectual Elite Third Shock Army.

The Koch brother have less than NOTHING to do with my Healthcare and education.

You are a useful idiot because you don't even realize you're spewing Marxists talking points. That's how total the control is over what you think are your "thoughts"

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

You, Sir, are a fucking moron and that's probably an insult to many proud morons.

Wow, that's a really convincing argument.

When people post personal insults with no facts, it means they have nothing.

But you never really post any facts anyway, Frank, your posts are just a series of invectives.

 

[bripat9643]

The 'class warfare' has intensified since the election of RR in 1980. Break the political power of the corporations and that of their lackeys and stooges.

Are you still pretending to be a Republican?

This guy couldn't even pass as a liberal. I couldn't do a better imitation of a Stalinist.

 

[MikeK]

I'm still waiting for the Left to Absolutely define what "Rich" is where is the line drawn?

More than simply "Left" I can be described as having Socialist leanings. As such I define rich as being able to fully own at least one fine quality home, at least one luxury car, at least one million dollars in liquid assets, an annual income of at least $250k and no debts. That is what I call wealth. Anything more than that is what I call excessive wealth.

In a social environment where there is no homelessness or poverty I would have no problem with any level of wealth. But in a social environment such as today's United States I have a very big problem with the class of citizens who have accumulated and hoard unreasonable levels of excessive wealth.

To take it a step further I believe any personal assets in excess of twenty million dollars should be confiscated by the IRS and used to address the deficit, provide free college tuition to qualified individuals, create massive employment by overhauling our crumbling infrastructure and provide single-payer health care for all citizens.

We would then have the kind of nation America should be. There would be many millionaires but no billionaires. And I want to hear one greedy bastard tell me he or she simply can't make it on twenty million dollars.

 

[editec]

The Massport Board approved the Logan landing fee at $4.61 per 1,000 pounds, which is .14 cents below the $4.75 landing fee approved last year.

Now it takes just as much Air traffic control time and effort to land a small private jet as it does a Jumbo commercial liner.

But notice how the fees are structured?

Must be nice to own a private jet.

 

[bripat9643]

The Massport Board approved the Logan landing fee at $4.61 per 1,000 pounds, which is .14 cents below the $4.75 landing fee approved last year.

Now it takes just as much Air traffic control time and effort to land a small private jet as it does a Jumbo commercial liner.

But notice how the fees are structured?

Must be nice to own a private jet.

A 6 year old takes just as much space in a movie theater as an adult, not notice the difference in ticket prices.

Did you ever think the cost of air traffic control might not be the only consideration in the price?

You can stop at admitting you don't think.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As I suspected, you are uninformed.

The Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party which wants to reduce taxes. Without taxes schools cannot operate and neither can healthcare programs for children. But this is what the Republicans want....to turn America into Dickinsean England.

They have almost succeeded by creating this massive debt that Reagan and the two Bushes created. They must be stopped.

You, Sir, are a fucking moron and that's probably an insult to many proud morons.

Wow, that's a really convincing argument.

When people post personal insults with no facts, it means they have nothing.

But you never really post any facts anyway, Frank, your posts are just a series of invectives.

Your post made less than no sense, Chris. You went from Koch Brothers to property taxes like there was some coherent reasoning and frankly, you should know better.

 

[The T]

The 'class warfare' has intensified since the election of RR in 1980. Break the political power of the corporations and that of their lackeys and stooges.

Are you still pretending to be a Republican?

He's pretending to be Conservative and Republican.

 

[Gadawg73]

How many "jobs" do you suppose that jet provides?

Manufacturing
Mechanics
Parts suppliers
Pilots
Training schools
Flight stewards

Anyone notice the trickle down effect?

How many taxes are raised because of each jet sold and the jobs it creates.


Stupidity has no limits apparently.

You're PRESUMING that the jet would NOT be built if the buyer had to pay more taxes?
The fact IS that many of those rich folks DO INDEED pay taxes and can also buy jets, (yes, they walk and chew gum at the same time!)

You're premise that ONLY WITHOUT TAXATION will jets be built is fallacious both on fact and economic theory. Jets are manufactured in many nations where no tax breaks on their purchase exist for the buyers, (including for some makers and buyers in the USA).

We call your assertion a "gun to the head" argument. (Which goes like this: "Give me my tax break or I'll not buy your jet.")

Sorry, not a convincing argument, sounds more like an attempt to browbeat or intimidate or blackmail rather than a solid economic principle.

The fact is that raising taxes on ANYTHING, as the ridiculous corporate jet scenario was brought into the debate by OBAMA, will not do a damn thing to fix the deficit.
SPENDING too much on BS programs IS THE PROBLEM. Not depreciation tables on corporate jets.
If that is not "solid economic principle" then nothing is.