patrick.net

dublin hillz says

Which is why the only vehicle to fairness is to ensure that part timers
making minimum wage are also taxed at 39%. Only when they have skin in the game,
something at stake will they truly learn that shit ain't free....

You do realize that part-timers making minimum wage pay the same rate on their first $12k in income that a doctor pays on his first $12k in income, right?

control point says

dublin hillz says

Which is why the only vehicle to fairness is to ensure that part timers
making minimum wage are also taxed at 39%. Only when they have skin in the game,
something at stake will they truly learn that shit ain't free....

You do realize that part-timers making minimum wage pay the same rate on their first $12k in income that a doctor pays on his first $12k in income, right?

Of course, so the solution is to just drop the 39.6% rate on the first cent that is earned....

dublin hillz says

Which is why the only vehicle to fairness is to ensure that part timers making minimum wage are also taxed at 39%. Only when they have skin in the game, something at stake will they truly learn that shit ain't free....

That would entirely depend on ones definition of fairness...

dublin hillz says

Of course, so the solution is to just drop the 39.6% rate on the first cent
that is earned....

Sure. Just have to equalize the pay rates for each now....

give me back my surplus value! now!

control point says

dublin hillz says

Of course, so the solution is to just drop the 39.6% rate on the first cent
that is earned....

Sure. Just have to equalize the pay rates for each now....

That is not really necessary because the capitalist "invisible hand" will work in such a way that rents, groceries, car insurance, consumer staples, bus passes will adjust downwards in price to negate the loss of consumer purchase power due to higher taxes. And as an added bonus due to having skin in the game, the poor will learn good ol' values that shit ain't free. In essence the higher tax bracket can "spread the wealth around" from these companies that will lower prices due to invisible hand to for example our military which will get dibs on extra 20% on that revenue. Thus, they can build even greater fighter jets, tanks and stock up on them bombs. Consequently, russia, china and iran will never fuck with us again and when people go shopping to the mall they will never have to look up at the sky to wonder if today is the day that we will get bombed.

I love how people demonize the wealthy as undeserving of what they have and that it's all luck. Sure, there are people who are born into wealth...but for every person born into it, there's a person who took risks and worked their butt off to truly earn it. Are you going to build a committee to determine whether someone truly earns their wealth? If that's the case, all lottery winners wouldn't get anything and would have to give it back to the gov't since it was pure luck and they didn't earn a dime. This thinking is ridiculous.

If anything, tax huge estates being passed on to heirs instead of taxing the brains out of somebody making $250,000 per year trying to support a family on his own in NYC or CA. Also, I could see getting rid of the dividend and capital gains tax rates and just having that taxed at normal income rates...that would solve your Romney/Buffet whining.

debyne says

I love how people demonize the wealthy as undeserving of what they have and that it's all luck. Sure, there are people who are born into wealth...but for every person born into it, there's a person who took risks and worked their butt off to truly earn it

http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

Bullcrap.

The only one on that top 10 list who could be called self-made, meaning he came from a working or middle class family, is Ellison. And he was greatly helped by massive Cold War MIC Spending funded, of course, by taxpayers. Every other one came from a top 1% (usually .1%) family.

When 90% of Americans are Middle Class, Working Class, or Lumpenproles, but only 1 of the top ten richest people come from 90% of America, what does that tell you?

Reality says

Presumably, you are keeping your job working for someone else because it pays more than you'd make on your own.

This is dependent on the system of economics and laws used by a society and that is exactly what I am questioning. Is it beyond your imagination that mankind could possibly come up with an economic system that is superior to capitalism in the modern, technology driven world? Or does your religion have such a strong sway over you that it is inconceivable that an economic system developed in Middle Ages and peaked in the 18th century could possibly be made obsolete by technological and social advancements?

A local maximum is rarely a global maximum, and those local and global maximums are subject to change whenever the environment changes. As such it is certainly reasonable for the people to demand such changes so that they can explore new strategies that would yield higher satisfaction.

Reality says

The federal income tax was intended to make the federal reserve note introduced in that same year (1913) worth something, as in creating a market demand (to pay taxes).

The federal income tax was a bargaining chip that the bankers used to get President Wilson to accept a central bank, the Federal Reserve. Wilson wanted social safety nets for the poor. The federal income tax, which he had intended only the rich to pay, was Wilson's means to pay for those social safety nets and anti-poverty programs. Ironically, today the rich pay far less income tax than the middle class. See Mitt Romney.

Wilson accepted the deal that he would allow the Federal Reserve in exchange for this tax. Wilson later regretted the deal saying,

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.

This is a long, but good documentary on the history of money and central banking. It's been posted on this site many times, but still more people need to watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/HfpO-WBz_mw

thunderlips11 says

debyne says

I love how people demonize the wealthy as undeserving of what they have and that it's all luck. Sure, there are people who are born into wealth...but for every person born into it, there's a person who took risks and worked their butt off to truly earn it

http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

Bullcrap.

The only one on that top 10 list who could be called self-made, meaning he came from a working or middle class family, is Ellison. And he was greatly helped by massive Cold War MIC Spending funded, of course, by taxpayers. Every other one came from a top 1% (usually .1%) family.

When 90% of Americans are Middle Class, Working Class, or Lumpenproles, but only 1 of the top ten richest people come from 90% of America, what does that tell you?

You're talking about a handful of multi-billionaires...hardly a representative sample to make your argument. What do you consider wealthy? Is a brain surgeon wealthy, or do you have to be Larry Ellison?

jazz music says

@ debyne: I demonize the *fallacy* of calling the system capitalism when it is cronyism.

There are no self-made men unless they somehow rose from jungle isolation to prominence in Burlingame: The lucky newly rich played the system like a violin. The old money cliques socially ostracize the newly rich because they mostly wind up falling back to earth. (not having that inheritance backing them)

So what's your alternative? Socialism? You're referring to capitalism as cronyism when that's not the case. Capitalism is not what you see today. Cronyism on both sides is what you see today, and the common denominator is government. So why wouldn't you want to shrink government so that cronyism in DC is less likely to happen? Going socialist and increasing government just makes the problem worse.

debyne says

You're talking about a handful of multi-billionaires...hardly a representative sample to make your argument. What do you consider wealthy? Is a brain surgeon wealthy, or do you have to be Larry Ellison?

Wealthy to me means you can live a middle class lifestyle off your wealth, without needing a job, social security payments, or pension. Hence, "Wealthy".

@thunderlips

Wow...and that's a bad thing? You want to take that away from someone who achieves that through hard work, discipline and being smart? Our country is screwed.

tatupu70 says

Reality says

The real issue is whether the other societal members are better served by letting the person who earned the money to decide how the money is spent

And by "earned", you mean won the birth lottery. Once you take away the facade that the rich are smarter than everyone else, that entire line of thinking falls away.

Not at all. Political priviledges are far more heritable from one generation to the next than wealth in a competitive market place. In fact, the old money started dabbling in politics precisely in order to find a way to preserve family wealth and status in subsequent generations; e.g. Roosevelts, Kennedys, Bushes, etc.. Those heritable political provileges are akin to aristocracy. The emergence of relatively free market place was what displaced the European aristocracy after the Englightenment. What the leftist pursue as the socialist ideal is in reality nothing more than the reinstatement of aristocracy sheltered from the vagaries of market competition and creative destruction. The result is declining social mobility for subsequent generations.

control point says

The bottom line is even those that are extremely weathly by the sweat of their
own brow are not the smartest or most talented members of our society. Is there
a correlation between IQ and wealth? Certainly - though it is not 1.

Why should high IQ be rewarded? Should an exceptionally clever mass murderer be richly rewarded? Although they usually are in the political world: the exceptionally clever mass murderers are usually called "the leaders."

Free market means market participants, especially the average Joe and Jane consumers, are able to spend their resources as they see fit. The result is that those catering to Joe and Jane the average consumers the best tend to get resources to make the next generation of goods and services that Joes and Janes are more likely to like. It's as simple as that. The clever mass murderers and their witting and unwitting lackeys OTOH always try to tell Joe and Jane that the clever mass murderers and their lackeys are better at allocating resources, according to some made-up template instead of free individual choice in the market place.

Dan8267 says

Reality
says

Presumably, you are keeping your job working for someone else because it pays
more than you'd make on your own.

This is dependent on the system of economics and laws used by a society and
that is exactly what I am questioning.

There is only one set of natural law and economics: individual human action. All the writen laws are little more than facade. If your software is as enticing as porn or drugs, no amount of man made law can keep your software from the black market.

Is it beyond your imagination that
mankind could possibly come up with an economic system that is superior to
capitalism in the modern, technology driven world?

There have been many utopian dreams concocted to displace free individual human choice . . . they all failed miserably. Every generation of human being has been living in a "modern, technology driven world" compared to prior generations ever since at least when the wheel was invented and the horse was tamed.

Or does your religion have
such a strong sway over you that it is inconceivable that an economic system
developed in Middle Ages and peaked in the 18th century could possibly be made
obsolete by technological and social advancements?

Relatively free market economy has emerged and faded in human history several times. The Mediterranean had a relatively free market economy before the age of Roman Empire. That was about 1500 years before the current relatively free market economy started to take shape some 500 years ago. 1500 years before Roman Empire, there was a free wheeling economy in the Indus Valley. Incidentally, indoor plumbing also emerged in human history three times, roughly corresponding to the tail end of those three relatively free market eras. There's something to be said about youths born into high standards of living, then proceed to turn their own society back to the stone age, or at least making it so poor that their offsprings having to shit in the out-house instead.

Reality says

There have been many utopian dreams concocted to displace free individual human choice . . . they all failed miserably.

The current US implementation of capitalism displaces free individual human choice. How much choice do you have in the terms of service with your bank, your phone company, your ISP? When was the last time you negotiated a contract on equal footing with a company?

Dan8267 says

Reality says

There have been many utopian dreams concocted to displace free individual human choice . . . they all failed miserably.

The current US implementation of capitalism displaces free individual human choice. How much choice do you have in the terms of service with your bank, your phone company, your ISP? When was the last time you negotiated a contract on equal footing with a company?

There is no such thing as "the current US implementation of capitalism." The government can only implement government control, whatever the name such control is. Free market is decision by individuals, no bureaucratic "implementation" needs to apply.

Monopoly and Oligopoly are usually the result of government intervention in the market place.

bob2356 says

Crony capitalism is using the government to further corporate aims in an illicit manner. Either through funding obtained without the proper processes being followed or using government to hinder competitors.

Yep.

bob2356 says

In the past examples would include the extreme financial irregularities (putting it mildly, fraud would be closer to the truth)

In the very recent past clear cut fraud going unprosecuted, instead of jailing the involved partied the government/Fed keeps the million dollar bonus party going with taxpayer money. Try selling a couple of lemons on the used car market, bragging after the sale in emails how you got rid of that "crap" and made money and see how fast your ass lands in jail for fraud. Anyone thinking that a government that corrupt will use more tax money wisely is anywhere between foolish and disingenuous.

Reality says

Fiat money is the biggest Crony capitalist scheme going, both now and at the time of John Law, and in between whenever there is a fiat money system. The other aspects of Crony Capitalism often has to rely on Fiat money system to keep going. John Law's experiment had both Crony capitalism in general and fiat money system in one major particular aspect written all over it. It was the first attempt at a modern state controlled economy . . . via bubble making by government officials to pay for government spending and to enrich well-connected cronies at the same time. Sounds familiar?

Agreed - it's an extremely powerful tool because it is legal for the gov/Fed but severely punish for the common guy to counterfeit and basically controls money supply and distribution thereof. These cases where the same action is ok for the government to engage in but a crime for the common man should be kept at an absolute minimum at ALL times (hence illegally obtain evidence is usually not admissible in court) in order to protect the common citizen from the tyranny of the government.

mell says

In the very recent past clear cut fraud going unprosecuted, instead of jailing the involved partied the government/Fed keeps the million dollar bonus party going with taxpayer money.

That's a very common complaint, but I've yet to see anyone state exactly what was the fraudulant behavior and show the proof.

mell says

Try selling a couple of lemons on the used car market, bragging after the sale in emails how you got rid of that "crap" and made money and see how fast your ass lands in jail for fraud

Used car dealers do it every day. It's not against the law to sell something that you wouldn't buy yourself. Hell, a majority of people that sell their stock think it's going down. Doesn't make them a criminal. Having said that--I believe that they should be in jail too because there's no way folks didn't know that the securities were not AAA. But what I know and what I can prove are two different things.

The Professor says

In the 50's and early 60's money was real. A dime was made of silver and you could buy 2 candy bars or a beer with it. Now it takes at least 4 zinc quarter dollar tokens to buy the same.

Who cares?? Other than being nostaglic, all that matters is real income and productivity. Both of which have risen significantly since the 1940s. Fiat money is a red herring that diverts people from the real issue. It's almost meaningless in the big picture.

The Professor says

What is the real issue?

Income/wealth distribution

tatupu70 says

The Professor says

What is the real issue?

Income/wealth distribution

You nailed it. We've gotten worse and worse at robbing from those who have earned and giving to those who haven't. Until we fix that, we'll continue to be building a nation of deadbeats.

tatupu70 says

That's a very common complaint, but I've yet to see anyone state exactly what was the fraudulant behavior and show the proof.

tatupu70 says

Used car dealers do it every day. It's not against the law to sell something that you wouldn't buy yourself.

No, the proof has been given and presented on numerous websites and occasions, these emails exist, e.g. from GS were they were bragging about selling that crap. Used car dealers that sell lemons and provide proof (written, orally, email) that they knew are car was defect land in jail immediately, same should apply to bankers, but doesn't.

debyne says

You nailed it. We've gotten worse and worse at robbing from those who have earned and giving to those who haven't. Until we fix that, we'll continue to be building a nation of deadbeats.

Interesting. So all the data measuing income/wealth distribution are incorrect then?

And the CEO has "earned" a salary 1,000 times greater than the operator on the line that actually makes the widgets?

debyne says

@thunderlips

Wow...and that's a bad thing? You want to take that away from someone who achieves that through hard work, discipline and being smart? Our country is screwed.

Nice move. First we spoke about how almost all of the 10 richest people in the US inherited their wealth, being born in the top 1%. Then you asked me for a defintiion of wealthy.

Now you're asserting, without proof, the hard work/discipline/smart BS a second time.

mell says

No, the proof has been given and presented on numerous websites and occasions, these emails exist, e.g. from GS were they were bragging about selling that crap.

That's not against the law.

mell says

Used car dealers that sell lemons and provide proof (written, orally, email) that they knew are car was defect land in jail immediately, same should apply to bankers, but doesn't.

That's true. Do you have sources that show that the bankers mischaracterized the risk of the securities? They were rated AAA after all. If anyone should be going to jail, it should be Moody's IMO.

tatupu70 says

debyne says

You nailed it. We've gotten worse and worse at robbing from those who have earned and giving to those who haven't. Until we fix that, we'll continue to be building a nation of deadbeats.

Interesting. So all the data measuing income/wealth distribution are incorrect then?

And the CEO has "earned" a salary 1,000 times greater than the operator on the line that actually makes the widgets?

Income and wealth are two entirely different subjects. Best not to attempt to conflate the two.

The disparity in incomes, is a result of paying most laborers, by the hour. As technology improves, and capital investments are made, the workers toil less and less, to produce the same amount of goods/services.

The time component in economic musings, confuses the hell out of most people.

Unions and their gift of the 40 hour work week, are partly to blame. As technology improves (making tasks take less energy, effort, and time) p, workers should be putting in less and less hours. Rather then union shops with lifetime shleps standing around watching machines do the work, where people rack up overtime, should have instead fought for something of more value. Like the eight hour work week.

It's not income inequality, it's "Opportunity" inequality that is killing this country. And there's not a day that doesn't go by, with out some Washington shitbag doing something to further along that decline.

Let's face it, there will never be a time, where people work 15 to 20 hours a week flipping burgers or serving baked goods with a Lucite salad tong, will ever be making a living wage. When that happens, then only rich people will be able to afford to even buy a cup of coffee. And that living wage that those people though they had, will be consumed just in rent, which will also be the price of a tea and a slice.

Wgaes don't necessarily have to rise, in order to make things work. Prices of necessities could fall in line with wages, and we'd all be better off.

The entire concept of taxing labor to the hilt, while allowing land ownership to be taxed at a pittance, was always doomed to end up with what we have now.

For the landowner, his pittance of a tax (a constitutional tax at that), comes with it all the protections and efforts of the government from the top down. The navy and the rest of the military, to protect the homeland. The police state to fend off the poor.

For the labourer, he is burdened with the weight of the world, for merely the privilege to go out and earn a living. Its insane.

End the federal income tax, and restore constitutional taxes on land ownership, and there would be no discussion of income inequality

errc says

The disparity in incomes, is a result of paying most laborers, by the hour. As technology improves, and capital investments are made, the workers toil less and less, to produce the same amount of goods/services.

Uh, no they don't. They produce more/hour and toil more. There's just fewer of them.

errc says

Unions and their gift of the 40 hour work week, are partly to blame. As technology improves (making tasks take less energy, effort, and time) p, workers should be putting in less and less hours. Rather then union shops with lifetime shleps standing around watching machines do the work, where people rack up overtime, should have instead fought for something of more value. Like the eight hour work week.

This is high comedy (no pun intended for you errc). Unions are to BLAME?? If it weren't for unions, we'd still have 60-80 hour workweeks.

I'm not sure what union shops you have visited--but you're sorely mistaken. It sounds like the ones you went to have completely incompetent management. Laying off union workers is not difficult.

The politicians that voted to bail out the financial institutions, are the criminals that belong in jail.

Where does it read in our constitution that it is within the duty of the wsfedgov to print money (promise further taxing on future labor yet to be toiled) and fork it over to the likes of AIG and WFC, JPM, GS and the like?

We would have 60-80 hour work weeks?!?

Someone is smoking on a Wednesday am, and its not me.

My friends that work in union shops, do work 60 hour work weeks.
Johnson and Johnson
Armstrong

They actually have said, they don't work. They stand around and finger their phones, and take naps and bullshit with the other union shleps, for 28$ per hour. The machines do all the work. If the machines break, they call in a tech to repair them

errc says

My friends that work in union shops, do work 60 hour work weeks.

Johnson and Johnson

Armstrong

They actually have said, they don't work. They stand around and finger their phones, and take naps and bullshit with the other union shleps, for 28$ per hour. The machines do all the work. If the machines break, they call in a tech to repair them

Like I said--your friends need to do their jobs then. I work in a union shop and discipline is clearly written in the contract. If you let guys play on their phones, take naps(!!??) at work, then they will. That has nothing to do with union vs. non-union.

tatupu70 says

mell says

No, the proof has been given and presented on numerous websites and occasions, these emails exist, e.g. from GS were they were bragging about selling that crap.

That's not against the law.

mell says

Used car dealers that sell lemons and provide proof (written, orally, email) that they knew are car was defect land in jail immediately, same should apply to bankers, but doesn't.

That's true. Do you have sources that show that the bankers mischaracterized the risk of the securities? They were rated AAA after all. If anyone should be going to jail, it should be Moody's IMO.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud

"A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury."

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/04/14/173896/wall-street-deal-pi/

"For instance, one Deutcshe Bank trader, Greg Lippman, described the assets his bank was peddling as “crap” and “an absolute pig”:
– Email regarding GSAMP 06-NC2 M8, an RMBS security that contained New Century loans and was issued by Goldman Sachs: “[T]his is an absolute pig.” (12/8/2006)
– Email describing ABSHE 2006-HE1 M7, a subprime RMBS security issued by Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust, as a “crap deal”; and describing ACE 2006 HE2 M7, a subprime RMBS securitization issued by ACE Securities Corp., as: “[D]eal is a pig!” (3/1/2007)
Goldman Sachs did the same thing (in less colorful language), going so far as to tell investors that it’s interests “were aligned” with their own, even as it was spending billions betting against the very securities that it was selling. In all, Goldman “generated net revenues of $3.7 billion” betting against securities."

You can split hairs about the degree of illegality but you can bet that any average joe doing something like this goes to jail for a long long time. The government not only turned a blind eye but teamed up with the Fed and handed them freshly minted fiat as a rewards for fraud and failure. No wonder people refuse to pay more taxes.

errc says

The politicians that voted to bail out the financial institutions, are the criminals that belong in jail.

Where does it read in our constitution that it is within the duty of the wsfedgov to print money (promise further taxing on future labor yet to be toiled) and fork it over to the likes of AIG and WFC, JPM, GS and the like?

100% agreed.

mell says

You can split hairs about the degree of illegality but you can bet that any average joe doing something like this goes to jail for a long long time

OK--I'll make that bet. If I had a security with a Moody's AAA rating, it doesn't matter if I think it's a dog. Moody's is an expert in evaluating risk--I am not. Their rating carries much, much more weight than mine. I could email til the cows come home and it won't matter. It's just my opinion vs. a Moody rating.

mell says

The government not only turned a blind eye but teamed up with the Fed and handed them freshly minted fiat as a rewards for fraud and failure. No wonder people refuse to pay more taxes.

Turned a blind eye? They tried to stop the bonus payments, and have been investigating Wall St. since 2008 to try to find a way to prosecute. Did you see the JP Morgan proposed settlement? I wouldn't call that doing nothing.