Obama - What is your opinion so far on his Presidency
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Yes, indeed. Bill Gates didn't work hard, I believe he was handed his fortune on a silver platter.
Reagan and both Bushs had the option to sign off on reduced spending. None of them did. Only Clinton worked on really cutting the pork off the budget. Blaming Obama is too little, too late. Its like a major act of hypocrisy to complain now
Yes, we all have the chance to be a Bill Gates so let's eliminate taxes for billionaires.
Silly me.:roll:
That Bill gates had a lot of balls to develop a software package that did nothing more than transform the lives of billions of people around the globe.... Why, he ought to have been satisfied with hearty slap on the back and maybe a ham sandwich or something.
You got a good idea there Avro... Hammer the living sh*t out of anyone that tries to make a lot of money... No one ever benefits from that.
Well, at this point he doesn't even need .00001% of his income to still live lavishly, so it's a bit meaningless really. He already contributes a lot to charitable funds, so good on him for that - but he should be giving more. I don't know exactly how it goes for the middle class, but the rich should probably be giving at least 20% of their annual income to those less fortunate.
I'll just throw this in for craps and giggles - any annual net income of $100,000 or more should apply the 20% rule. 10% for $60,000 - $100,000. And 5% for $50,000 - $60,000.
Why not establish one basic and achievable income level for everyone and anyone that makes anything above that amount has it confiscated?
Gets rid of your poverty problem, right?
I dunno.. I'm not an expert on this stuff.. but apparently this guy is..
[FONT=book antiqua, palatino, times new roman]
[/FONT]
That's way worse than what I suggested, lol
http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/singermag.html
:happy1:
So just to try and bring things back to where an average slow fella like myself can understand thing, ya know.
The US is now an economic basket case - Hihg Debt - Debt forecast to grow in the many Trillions in the next few years or so
The economy is short as we are in Canada of skilled employees.
China is running the Yuan as a direct subsidy for their exports - Only solution is for the West to make a joint and concerted effort to have the Chinese float their currency.
Restrict Chinese Investment in canada/US in strategic resources - means them all - we cannot own Chinese natural resources - goes both ways
Stop Chinese companies from bidding on Govt Contrcats - They did the same thing with their Stimulus - a knife cuts both ways.
US Debt - Tax cuts for people making over 1/4 of a million do not make sense - I exclude small business - That could also be graduated - over 2 mill - over 3 mill or something along those lines
Spending cuts are also required.
Take the gold plating off the Obama Care which protects union health benefits- corporate as well.
Set a limit on Malpractice awards - To many lawyers getting rich and creating nothing -
Defence - it will face massive cuts in the future - Base closures to program cuts - make it a one bill -- up or down vote - Set up a commission to define where the cuts will be.
Work with the Republicans - Not all are far right Wing same as not all Democrats are cut form the same bolt of cloth as Nancy Pelosi -
Many projects can be done that create work and will improve the economy - get rid of earmarks
Tax deductions for savings locked into long term investments 10-15 years minimum- Treasury Bonds that will rise or lower according to the latest rate changes.
I wouldn't jump up and down and say that. You should check with a surgeon who has put in an extra 7 years of study and is directly responsible for peoples lives everyday and see if he would be happy to earn the same as the grade 9 drop out who pushes a broom in a slaughter house. :lol::lol:
I don't disagree with your logic Goober.. It makes sense, especially in that it (my opinion) is parallel with the way that most folks would run their own financial affairs for their home/family.
I made those replies based on the sentiment that was expressed that society ought to punish those that excel in the marketplace and are rewarded for such.
I'd imagine that you can see the potential problems and long-term societal ramifications in the hypothetical scenario that I suggested.
That's kinda the point I'm making JLM... Punishing people for the heinous crime of making more money than the average person removes any incentive for people to excel in different areas.
Rich Americans Save Tax Cuts Instead of Spending, Moody's Says
Give the wealthiest Americans a tax cut and history suggests they will save the money rather than spend it.
Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush were followed by increases in the saving rate among the rich, according to data from Moody’s Analytics Inc. When taxes were raised under Bill Clinton, the saving rate fell.
The findings may weaken arguments by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress who say allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to lapse will prompt them to reduce their spending, harming the economy. President Barack Obama wants to extend the cuts for individuals earning less than $200,000 and couples earning less than $250,000 while ending them for those who earn more.
...
The Moody’s economists examined saving rates by income groups back to 1989. Their study uses statistics from the Federal Reserve’s quarterly Flow of Funds report, which gauges the net worth of households, and the Fed’s triennial Survey of Consumer Finances, a measure of balance sheets, pensions and incomes of U.S. families.
When tax legislation was signed by Clinton in 1993 -- raising the top tax rate to 39.6 percent from 31 percent -- the saving rate fell from 12.1 percent in the second quarter to 9.5 percent in the first quarter of 1994. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index rose 1.9 percent from July through September, after little change the previous three months.
When the first Bush tax cuts were signed into law in June 2001, pushing the top rate down to 35 percent, the wealthy boosted savings. The saving rate climbed to 2.8 percent in the first quarter of 2002 from minus 2 percent in the second quarter of 2001. The increased savings coincided with a 1.1 percent decline in the S&P 500 index.
The GOP, and Captain Morgan, are out of touch with reality...Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush were followed by increases in the saving rate among the rich, according to data from Moody’s Analytics Inc. When taxes were raised under Bill Clinton, the saving rate fell.
The findings may weaken arguments by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress who say allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to lapse will prompt them to reduce their spending, harming the economy. President Barack Obama wants to extend the cuts for individuals earning less than $200,000 and couples earning less than $250,000 while ending them for those who earn more.
...
The Moody’s economists examined saving rates by income groups back to 1989. Their study uses statistics from the Federal Reserve’s quarterly Flow of Funds report, which gauges the net worth of households, and the Fed’s triennial Survey of Consumer Finances, a measure of balance sheets, pensions and incomes of U.S. families.
When tax legislation was signed by Clinton in 1993 -- raising the top tax rate to 39.6 percent from 31 percent -- the saving rate fell from 12.1 percent in the second quarter to 9.5 percent in the first quarter of 1994. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index rose 1.9 percent from July through September, after little change the previous three months.
When the first Bush tax cuts were signed into law in June 2001, pushing the top rate down to 35 percent, the wealthy boosted savings. The saving rate climbed to 2.8 percent in the first quarter of 2002 from minus 2 percent in the second quarter of 2001. The increased savings coincided with a 1.1 percent decline in the S&P 500 index.
Removes any incentive? That is rubbish. Canada and many other nations have progressive tax rates, and that hasn't stopped any children from becoming engineers, doctors, inventors, entrepreneurs, or lawyers.
The reason is, that the higher taxes aren't as punitive on high incomes earners as even lower tax rates for lower income earners. The last $100 on my pay cheque is worth considerably more to me than the last $100 on my fathers pay cheque is worth to him.
If you review the thread you'll see the Capt. and I weren't discussing taxes - we were discussing the suggestion that everyone earn the same basic rate- pay attention. :lol:
You would have to break the Stmulus Bill down by District and what party holds for that area.- With nancy pelosi who is a frim believer in pork barrrel you can be assured that it was directed to certain districts - To think otherwise would be false.
They all do it.