We're In a Recovery?

[The Rabbi]

Oh Ed, I love it when you pretend to understand entrepreneurs. Let's roll play, I have a great idea for a new business, I go lenders but they all want a personal guarantee and the equity in my home to lend me the money to take that risk. And I need to quit my job to take that risk. Plus, I'm sitting in secular stagnation and worried about losing my house, sending my kids to college and retiring. But you (Mr. Never an Entrepreneur) think that a tax rate on earnings is going to make a difference. I likely won't pay any taxes for the first three years and have a 50/50 shot of bankruptcy - but you think I should be worried about taxes.

Ed, can you show me one single entrepreneur who ever made the leap or not based on tax rates?

DEAR, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND ENTREPRENEURSHIP. And you never will until you are one.

Bingo! The other misconception is that the wealthy are the ones starting new businesses. That is actually quite rare. Most new businesses are started by average everyday people who think they have a great idea or think they can provide the same product or service at a better price, and sometimes it's just by pure luck that they stumble upon something that takes off. Just ask Mark Zuckerberg.

And they get the money, how?
But entrpreneurship is not just starting businesses from scratch. It is about buying existing busineses to grow as well. And yes tax rates play a part in those decisions.

I don't know of any wealthy people who decided to stop trying to make more money because they thought the tax rates were too high. You do realize if that were the case, then we would have been sunk back in the 50's when the top rate was 90%. Of course, you also don't have a clue that nobody actually pays high tax rates, because there are so many ways around paying them. The fact is that most of the wealthy pay less than average middle class Americans, but you buffoons keep going back to the well crying that they pay too much. Regardless of the top rate, the wealthy have never paid anywhere close to the top rate at any time this past century. The sad thing is that you should know this.

So people find ways to shield income to avoid high tax rates. But no one decides not to make an investment because of the tax consequences.
Congratulations. I didnt do anything and you proved you dont know what the fuck you'retalking about.

Yea, you're right. I'm not going to continue to expand my business because I don't want to pay an extra 5% on my next $200,000 in earnings. You obviously know nothing when it comes to the motivation of those who run their own businesses.

Are you saying that people do not organize their investments based on tax considerations? You clearly know nothing.

 

[auditor0007]

Bingo! The other misconception is that the wealthy are the ones starting new businesses. That is actually quite rare. Most new businesses are started by average everyday people who think they have a great idea or think they can provide the same product or service at a better price, and sometimes it's just by pure luck that they stumble upon something that takes off. Just ask Mark Zuckerberg.

And they get the money, how?
But entrpreneurship is not just starting businesses from scratch. It is about buying existing busineses to grow as well. And yes tax rates play a part in those decisions.

I don't know of any wealthy people who decided to stop trying to make more money because they thought the tax rates were too high. You do realize if that were the case, then we would have been sunk back in the 50's when the top rate was 90%. Of course, you also don't have a clue that nobody actually pays high tax rates, because there are so many ways around paying them. The fact is that most of the wealthy pay less than average middle class Americans, but you buffoons keep going back to the well crying that they pay too much. Regardless of the top rate, the wealthy have never paid anywhere close to the top rate at any time this past century. The sad thing is that you should know this.

I know more about this than I should know. Agreed: lower the rate, remove loopholes. Not sure about mortgage deduction for primary residence? ~40% is way too high FED rate.

I have seen charts that clearly show NO MATTER what the tax rate is (91% 75% 28%) the FED has been unable to collect more than 20% * GDP since forever. Make tax rate 10% or 20% one page Rand Paul style. Get on with it.

The point is that nobody pays that 40% rate, so it really doesn't matter. We do need enough revenue to pay the bills. Our biggest problem is that neither Dems nor Republicans ever want to pay the bills. The Dems spend too much and the conservative Republicans think we can generate enough revenue to cover the bills with a 10% tax rate, which is ludicrous. Take away the Bush tax cuts and the two unpaid wars, and the debt would still be well under $10 trillion, the economy would be in better shape, and the rich would be doing just fine.

Wrong.
Take away the increased spending under Obama and the Democrats and leave the tax cuts and we would be showing balanced budgets.
You're not real bright on this "income tax" thing, are you?

You're a moron for not realizing how low tax revenues dropped as a percentage of GDP because of those tax cuts. BTW, Bush increased the spending. Obama just was never able to cut it back down, in most part due to the downturn in the economy and the need for larger spending on social welfare, which includes unemployment as well as welfare. Despite that, the fact is that Obama has kept spending almost level since he took office. Ignoring that fact does not change it, even though you will try so very hard to explain it away.

 

[The Rabbi]

And they get the money, how?
But entrpreneurship is not just starting businesses from scratch. It is about buying existing busineses to grow as well. And yes tax rates play a part in those decisions.

I don't know of any wealthy people who decided to stop trying to make more money because they thought the tax rates were too high. You do realize if that were the case, then we would have been sunk back in the 50's when the top rate was 90%. Of course, you also don't have a clue that nobody actually pays high tax rates, because there are so many ways around paying them. The fact is that most of the wealthy pay less than average middle class Americans, but you buffoons keep going back to the well crying that they pay too much. Regardless of the top rate, the wealthy have never paid anywhere close to the top rate at any time this past century. The sad thing is that you should know this.

STFU...you don't even have a clue on how the federal income tax works or where it goes......here's a hint....it doesn't go towards paying for social programs or making your life better...bet me and lose on this one, little fella.....

I really hate when imbeciles like you bother posting stupid shit. Go back to school and get an education sonny, and please grow up and act like an adult if you want to be considered one.

Translation: He showed what I wrote was contradictory and hurt my feelings. Wahh!

How can imbeciles like you and Dale hurt my feelings. My feelings are supposed to be hurt by the idiotic shit you post? Give me a break.

You protest too much. I show your post is garbage and self contradictory and you get all huffy.

 

[leftwinger]

One other thing I can never forget it from RWR.
Reagan said he saw movie producers shut down for the year (near end of year) when they neared upper income (91% bracket) threshold and went to Vacation rather than make another movie. This shut down lower level workers along with them.......props, guards, lights etc.

 

[leftwinger]

The point is that nobody pays that 40% rate, so it really doesn't matter. We do need enough revenue to pay the bills.

I am not smart enough to know if they don't pay 40% because of loopholes or because the money moves-shifts around or GDP drops? I do know the chart shows no matter what upper tax rate is 20%*GDP is all they have ever been able to collect. Someone else may know why.

 

[leftwinger]

Bush increased the spending. Obama just was never able to cut it back down, in most part due to the downturn in the economy and the need for larger spending on social welfare, which includes unemployment as well as welfare. Despite that, the fact is that Obama has kept spending almost level since he took office.

This is where I have huge problem. GWB last year housing crash caused $786 Tarp in budget. one time charge to be paid back. BHO next year included stimulus and went even higher. From this astronomical rate...........yes, next years held relatively steady. Hardly any accomplishment.

I would think 100's of Billions in immediate cuts are low hanging fruit. $500 bil easy, then take look. they don't even try. They take staff of 500 off to a week in Paris wasting time/money on phony GW. Vacations, Travel of Biden Clinton Kerry Rice (around the world for years).

When running debt.........cut down to bare necessity. Like American families have had to do forever. This waste keeps me against the FED government. It is out and out theft from future generations.

 

[ScienceRocks]

we need to get back to 70% of r&d funding coming from the government as we were in the 50's and 60s. We need to reform education and enforce the anti-trust laws.

Lastly, if you care so much about debt we need to end the wars, repeal the tax cuts and fix our healthcare system.

 

[ScienceRocks]

And they get the money, how?
But entrpreneurship is not just starting businesses from scratch. It is about buying existing busineses to grow as well. And yes tax rates play a part in those decisions.

I don't know of any wealthy people who decided to stop trying to make more money because they thought the tax rates were too high. You do realize if that were the case, then we would have been sunk back in the 50's when the top rate was 90%. Of course, you also don't have a clue that nobody actually pays high tax rates, because there are so many ways around paying them. The fact is that most of the wealthy pay less than average middle class Americans, but you buffoons keep going back to the well crying that they pay too much. Regardless of the top rate, the wealthy have never paid anywhere close to the top rate at any time this past century. The sad thing is that you should know this.

I know more about this than I should know. Agreed: lower the rate, remove loopholes. Not sure about mortgage deduction for primary residence? ~40% is way too high FED rate.

I have seen charts that clearly show NO MATTER what the tax rate is (91% 75% 28%) the FED has been unable to collect more than 20% * GDP since forever. Make tax rate 10% or 20% one page Rand Paul style. Get on with it.

The point is that nobody pays that 40% rate, so it really doesn't matter. We do need enough revenue to pay the bills. Our biggest problem is that neither Dems nor Republicans ever want to pay the bills. The Dems spend too much and the conservative Republicans think we can generate enough revenue to cover the bills with a 10% tax rate, which is ludicrous. Take away the Bush tax cuts and the two unpaid wars, and the debt would still be well under $10 trillion, the economy would be in better shape, and the rich would be doing just fine.

Wrong.
Take away the increased spending under Obama and the Democrats and leave the tax cuts and we would be showing balanced budgets.
You're not real bright on this "income tax" thing, are you?

You're a moron for not realizing how low tax revenues dropped as a percentage of GDP because of those tax cuts. BTW, Bush increased the spending. Obama just was never able to cut it back down, in most part due to the downturn in the economy and the need for larger spending on social welfare, which includes unemployment as well as welfare. Despite that, the fact is that Obama has kept spending almost level since he took office. Ignoring that fact does not change it, even though you will try so very hard to explain it away.

Exactly,

Obama is spending less per capita on infrastructure, science and r&d then anytime in the past 80 years. It is the wars that the republicans started, the tax cuts and the bs that is causing our debt.

Yet, republicans don't want to listen...They're hell bent on gutting this country.

 

[Dale Smith]

Oh Ed, I love it when you pretend to understand entrepreneurs. Let's roll play, I have a great idea for a new business, I go lenders but they all want a personal guarantee and the equity in my home to lend me the money to take that risk. And I need to quit my job to take that risk. Plus, I'm sitting in secular stagnation and worried about losing my house, sending my kids to college and retiring. But you (Mr. Never an Entrepreneur) think that a tax rate on earnings is going to make a difference. I likely won't pay any taxes for the first three years and have a 50/50 shot of bankruptcy - but you think I should be worried about taxes.

Ed, can you show me one single entrepreneur who ever made the leap or not based on tax rates?

DEAR, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND ENTREPRENEURSHIP. And you never will until you are one.

Bingo! The other misconception is that the wealthy are the ones starting new businesses. That is actually quite rare. Most new businesses are started by average everyday people who think they have a great idea or think they can provide the same product or service at a better price, and sometimes it's just by pure luck that they stumble upon something that takes off. Just ask Mark Zuckerberg.

And they get the money, how?
But entrpreneurship is not just starting businesses from scratch. It is about buying existing busineses to grow as well. And yes tax rates play a part in those decisions.

I don't know of any wealthy people who decided to stop trying to make more money because they thought the tax rates were too high. You do realize if that were the case, then we would have been sunk back in the 50's when the top rate was 90%. Of course, you also don't have a clue that nobody actually pays high tax rates, because there are so many ways around paying them. The fact is that most of the wealthy pay less than average middle class Americans, but you buffoons keep going back to the well crying that they pay too much. Regardless of the top rate, the wealthy have never paid anywhere close to the top rate at any time this past century. The sad thing is that you should know this.

STFU...you don't even have a clue on how the federal income tax works or where it goes......here's a hint....it doesn't go towards paying for social programs or making your life better...bet me and lose on this one, little fella.....

I really hate when imbeciles like you bother posting stupid shit. Go back to school and get an education sonny, and please grow up and act like an adult if you want to be considered one.

I know exactly of what I speak and I have spent over 12,000 hours reading and researching on how this corporation that is America actually works and I doubt you would even be able to warp your mind around the lies and deceptions that made all of us involuntary indentured debt slaves...that is where your federal income tax goes. You have questions? You doubt what I say is true? Then let's talk about it but get out of this left versus right paradigm because at the top, both political parties work hand in glove with each other on behalf of USA.INC.

 

[Dale Smith]

we need to get back to 70% of r&d funding coming from the government as we were in the 50's and 60s. We need to reform education and enforce the anti-trust laws.

Lastly, if you care so much about debt we need to end the wars, repeal the tax cuts and fix our healthcare system.

Repeal all the unfair "free trade " agreements that have allowed cheap goods into this country made with slave labor and put the tariff laws back in place and of course, do away with the foreign owned Federal Reserve central banking system that has been sucking this country dry like a parasite since 1913.

 

[Dale Smith]

STFU...you don't even have a clue on how the federal income tax works or where it goes......here's a hint....it doesn't go towards paying for social programs or making your life better...bet me and lose on this one, little fella.....

dear stupid stupid liberal, why not tell us how social programs and making lives better get paid for if not in part from the income tax!!!.

Not a liberal..as a matter of fact, I despise them. Liberals think high income taxes would benefit the poor and redistribution of wealth is a good idea. The fact is that less than 10 percent of what we pay for ever makes it to the Treasury department when we are taxed on our labor...the rest goes to the shareholders of the Federal Reserve banking oligarchs for extending USA.INC credit that they pulled out of their asses. It is the greatest scam ever put on the people. The IRS is actually a Puerto Rican Trust and a collection arm of the International Monetary Fund.

 

[pinqy]

Not meaning to get involved in your little lame flame war, but if you are claiming that unemployment and under employment isn't as bad as the statistics say?

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the Rabbi does not understand what the statistics actually mean. Neither, apparently, do you.

Allow me to give you a clearer picture of what the average "Johnny Lunchpail" is facing these days. 93 million work legible Americans are out of a job...

"Out of a job?" That seems to imply they want a job. You are talking about the 94.4 million people Not in the Labor Force. These are people who are neither working nor looking for work. 89 million don't want a job, and while the others say they want one, they're not doing anything about work.
A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex
And for some reason, you're not including the 8 million unemployed, who are trying to get a job.

 

[Dale Smith]

Not meaning to get involved in your little lame flame war, but if you are claiming that unemployment and under employment isn't as bad as the statistics say?

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the Rabbi does not understand what the statistics actually mean. Neither, apparently, do you.

Allow me to give you a clearer picture of what the average "Johnny Lunchpail" is facing these days. 93 million work legible Americans are out of a job...

"Out of a job?" That seems to imply they want a job. You are talking about the 94.4 million people Not in the Labor Force. These are people who are neither working nor looking for work. 89 million don't want a job, and while the others say they want one, they're not doing anything about work.
A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex
And for some reason, you're not including the 8 million unemployed, who are trying to get a job.

The work participation rate is 62.6 percent of people eligible to work. Once your unemployment has run out, you are no longer counted in the statistics of the "unemployed" and if you work a part-time job, you are considered employed. 51 percent of everyone that even has a job makes 30K or less a year. 38 percent of all American workers made less than $20,000 last year.
62 percent of all American workers made less than $40,000 last year.71 percent of all American workers made less than $50,000 last year. The federal poverty level for a family of five is 28,410 dollars and yet almost 40 percent of all American workers do not even bring in $20,000 a year. The quantitative easing done by the foreign owned and unconstitutional Federal Reserve banking shysters has further debased this fiat currency with inflation rising three percent a year so the dollar buys less and less while prices go up. Stop pretending that all is well here in USA.INC because that is far from the situation and no amount of spin is going to change that. The middle class is being dismantled piece by piece and that jug-eared POS who is the spokesperson for this corporate "gubermint" has helped sell everyone out..."hope and change" my ass. New boss is the same as the old boss and it is business as usual. The powers that be want two classes...elites and serfs and they are well on the way to making that happen. Wake the fuck up and take off the blinders. They have opened up the southern border, they are flying in muslim refugees overtly and covertly and dropping them off in cities and towns with no warning which uses up resources that could be used for people that are just trying to get by and you are fine with that? Just because Bushpuppet had no balls doesn't excuse for the pantywaisted Barrypuppet for being a ball-less wonder.

 

[pinqy]

Not meaning to get involved in your little lame flame war, but if you are claiming that unemployment and under employment isn't as bad as the statistics say?

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the Rabbi does not understand what the statistics actually mean. Neither, apparently, do you.

Allow me to give you a clearer picture of what the average "Johnny Lunchpail" is facing these days. 93 million work legible Americans are out of a job...

"Out of a job?" That seems to imply they want a job. You are talking about the 94.4 million people Not in the Labor Force. These are people who are neither working nor looking for work. 89 million don't want a job, and while the others say they want one, they're not doing anything about work.
A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex
And for some reason, you're not including the 8 million unemployed, who are trying to get a job.

The work participation rate is 62.6 percent of people eligible to work.

You're citing the labor force participation rate: the percent of the adult civilian noninstitutional population that is either employed or unemployed (available and looking for work. The percent working is 59.3%
But you ignored my point that most people not working don't want a job.

Once your unemployment has run out, you are no longer counted in the statistics of the "unemployed"

Where did you get that idea?
6. Is the count of unemployed persons limited to just those people receiving unemployment insurance benefits?

No; the estimate of unemployment is based on a monthly sample survey of households.
All persons who are without jobs and are actively seeking and available to work are included among the unemployed. (People on temporary layoff are included even if they do not actively seek work.) There is no requirement or question relating to unemployment insurance benefits in the monthly survey.
Employment Situation Frequently Asked Questions

and if you work a part-time job, you are considered employed.

Why wouldn't they be?

51 percent of everyone that even has a job makes 30K or less a year. 38 percent of all American workers made less than $20,000 last year.

You know you're including part time workers in those averages? The median salary for full time workers (35+ hours/week) was $791/week ($41,000/year) in 2014 Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by selected characteristics

 

[Dale Smith]

"You're citing the labor force participation rate: the percent of the adult civilian noninstitutional population that is either employed or unemployed (available and looking for work. The percent working is 59.3%
But you ignored my point that most people not working don't want a job....

Do tell? So how they are existing? My stats are solid and it paints a very different picture than the one you are trying to portray. I lived in Detroit, Michigan for two and a half years and I saw first hand what the globalists have done to what was once the crown jewel of cities. I am back in Dallas now and I have numerous friends that are under employed and trying to get by because they have to work two part-time jobs because their employer doesn't want to provide them with healthcare and endure a penalty. The middle class is collapsing and I don't understand how you can't see that very salient fact.

 

[pinqy]

Labor force participation is going down, even as a supposed recovery is on. This never happens btw. Instead as people see jobs are more plentiful they are drawn back into the workforce, at first becoming unemployed and then employed.
It is a mark of Obama's total failure in economic policy that people arent seeing job opportunities.

I said LEVEL and you respond about the RATE. Do you not know the difference or were you intentionally avoiding the question?
As I already showed, the Labor Force level is increasing. But not steadily, and not as fast as the adult civilian noninstitutional population level, which is why the RATE has been going down. The reason for the gap is that more people do not want or need a job, so not as many are rejoining the labor force. There are many more retired, as well, an they have a large negative impact on the rate.
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population, 1944 to date
In 2007, the annual average was 231,867,000 people in the civilian noninstitutional population, 146,047,000 employed (working), 7,078,000 unemployed (looking for work)
At the same time, there were 74,040,000 not working or looking for work who did not want a job, and 4,703,00 who wanted a job.
http://www.bls.gov/cps/aa2007/aat35.txt
So, 63% working 3.1% looking for work, (66% labor force participation) 31.9% did not want a job and 2% wanted a job but not looking.

Annual average for 2014 was population of 247,947,000 population, 146,305,000 employed, 2,237,000 unemployed, 85,702,000 didn't want a job, and 6,323,000 wanted but didn't look.
So 59% employed, 1% unemployed (labor force of 60%) 34.6% didn't want a job, and 2.6% wanted but didn't look.

So the main reason for the drop in the labor force was more people who don't want/need a job.

 

[The Rabbi]

Labor force participation is going down, even as a supposed recovery is on. This never happens btw. Instead as people see jobs are more plentiful they are drawn back into the workforce, at first becoming unemployed and then employed.
It is a mark of Obama's total failure in economic policy that people arent seeing job opportunities.

I said LEVEL and you respond about the RATE. Do you not know the difference or were you intentionally avoiding the question?
As I already showed, the Labor Force level is increasing. But not steadily, and not as fast as the adult civilian noninstitutional population level, which is why the RATE has been going down. The reason for the gap is that more people do not want or need a job, so not as many are rejoining the labor force. There are many more retired, as well, an they have a large negative impact on the rate.
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population, 1944 to date
In 2007, the annual average was 231,867,000 people in the civilian noninstitutional population, 146,047,000 employed (working), 7,078,000 unemployed (looking for work)
At the same time, there were 74,040,000 not working or looking for work who did not want a job, and 4,703,00 who wanted a job.
http://www.bls.gov/cps/aa2007/aat35.txt
So, 63% working 3.1% looking for work, (66% labor force participation) 31.9% did not want a job and 2% wanted a job but not looking.

Annual average for 2014 was population of 247,947,000 population, 146,305,000 employed, 2,237,000 unemployed, 85,702,000 didn't want a job, and 6,323,000 wanted but didn't look.
So 59% employed, 1% unemployed (labor force of 60%) 34.6% didn't want a job, and 2.6% wanted but didn't look.

So the main reason for the drop in the labor force was more people who don't want/need a job.

You dont know jack shit about what you're blabbering about. That much has been proven already.

 

[auditor0007]

we need to get back to 70% of r&d funding coming from the government as we were in the 50's and 60s. We need to reform education and enforce the anti-trust laws.

Lastly, if you care so much about debt we need to end the wars, repeal the tax cuts and fix our healthcare system.

Repeal all the unfair "free trade " agreements that have allowed cheap goods into this country made with slave labor and put the tariff laws back in place and of course, do away with the foreign owned Federal Reserve central banking system that has been sucking this country dry like a parasite since 1913.

Yes, cutting ourselves off from the rest of the world make us number one for a long time to come. The rest of the world will be so hurt by our actions, lmao! What will happen is that the rest of the world will just pass us by. We are dealing with a world economy now. Those of you who don't want to acknowledge that will only try to doom us with your protectionist ideology.

 

[pinqy]

You're citing the labor force participation rate: the percent of the adult civilian noninstitutional population that is either employed or unemployed (available and looking for work. The percent working is 59.3%
But you ignored my point that most people not working don't want a job....

Do tell? So how they are existing?

Retirees not trying to work? High school and college students not trying to work? Stay home spouses? Disabled? How do you think they exist? Not everyone is able to or needs to work, and those are the majority of those not in the labor force. Some people are independently wealthy, and some people are bums or leeches or pot heads etc.

The middle class is collapsing and I don't understand how you can't see that very salient fact.

I don't recall mentioning that topic. Could you quote me to refresh my memory?

 

[pinqy]

Labor force participation is going down, even as a supposed recovery is on. This never happens btw. Instead as people see jobs are more plentiful they are drawn back into the workforce, at first becoming unemployed and then employed.
It is a mark of Obama's total failure in economic policy that people arent seeing job opportunities.

I said LEVEL and you respond about the RATE. Do you not know the difference or were you intentionally avoiding the question?
As I already showed, the Labor Force level is increasing. But not steadily, and not as fast as the adult civilian noninstitutional population level, which is why the RATE has been going down. The reason for the gap is that more people do not want or need a job, so not as many are rejoining the labor force. There are many more retired, as well, an they have a large negative impact on the rate.
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population, 1944 to date
In 2007, the annual average was 231,867,000 people in the civilian noninstitutional population, 146,047,000 employed (working), 7,078,000 unemployed (looking for work)
At the same time, there were 74,040,000 not working or looking for work who did not want a job, and 4,703,00 who wanted a job.
http://www.bls.gov/cps/aa2007/aat35.txt
So, 63% working 3.1% looking for work, (66% labor force participation) 31.9% did not want a job and 2% wanted a job but not looking.

Annual average for 2014 was population of 247,947,000 population, 146,305,000 employed, 2,237,000 unemployed, 85,702,000 didn't want a job, and 6,323,000 wanted but didn't look.
So 59% employed, 1% unemployed (labor force of 60%) 34.6% didn't want a job, and 2.6% wanted but didn't look.

So the main reason for the drop in the labor force was more people who don't want/need a job.

You dont know jack shit about what you're blabbering about. That much has been proven already.

oh? What have I said that is incorrect? With links, of course, to BLS or Census.