Obama facing strong racism

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

2005 numbers (% share of total tax burden):

Top 1%: 39.38%

Which they accomplish by paying at a much much lower rate than those taxpayers who make much less. Percentage of the pot is not the issue. Also, where did they make the money? In some cases, off of the taxpayer.

Lower rate - oh really? Last time I looked, 35% is more than 33%, 28%, 25%, 15% or 10%.

ALL money is "made off of the taxpayer" - who do you think pays for the goods and services that provide everyone else with jobs/dividends.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Lower rate - oh really? Last time I looked, 35% is more than 33%, 28%, 25%, 15% or 10%.

Do you pay your income tax rate? I didn't think so. Neither do I.

Quote

ALL money is "made off of the taxpayer" - who do you think pays for the goods and services that provide everyone else with jobs/dividends.

I'm talking about taxpayer subsidies like the ones I listed a few posts back. And sorry for the short answers but I'm pressed for time today. But go look up how Bush 43 made his money with the Rangers. It was through a 1/2 cent local tax hike, eminent domain seizures and a rent-to-own deal that put the taxpayer money straight into his pocket.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Lower rate - oh really? Last time I looked, 35% is more than 33%, 28%, 25%, 15% or 10%.

Do you pay your income tax rate? I didn't think so. Neither do I.

Neither does anyone else - what's your point?

Quote

Quote

ALL money is "made off of the taxpayer" - who do you think pays for the goods and services that provide everyone else with jobs/dividends.

I'm talking about taxpayer subsidies like the ones I listed a few posts back. And sorry for the short answers but I'm pressed for time today. But go look up how Bush 43 made his money with the Rangers. It was through a 1/2 cent local tax hike, eminent domain seizures and a rent-to-own deal that put the taxpayer money straight into his pocket.

Ok...and this is different from welfare / farm subsidies / carbon credits / etc. / etc. / etc. exactly HOW?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

What operating system are you referring to that does have it?

OS X has had it for at least the past three versions, possibly longer; I don't have enough experience with Jaguar to remember whether a global system spell check had been implemented or not.

Quote

I'd view it as bloat, in any event.

Why? If the user uses it, it's there. If the user prefers, it can be easily turned off and doesn't use system resources.

Quote

Firefox's approach is a better one - I think it's a good choice to use.

Is Firefox's spell check integrated into the application or via plugin?

Personally, I like the global approach so that it's always on when I'm typing and all applications use the same dictionary. But, to each their own. If you prefer each application implementing its own spell check, do it that way. Judging by your posts, misspelled words are not a significant issue, however you avoid them.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[idrankwhat 0]

My point is that the tax system is written to benefit the wealthy and that quoting tax rates is deceiving. And more and more over the last 30 years our government has gotten further and further away from the idea of the market based system in favor of allowing the wealthiest, most influential players to gain direct access to taxpayer money.
As for your "what's the difference" question, the answer is "none". Which was my point. The only difference that one might draw is that a million dollars going to a few hundred people might be better for the overall economy and the state of the nation than the same amount of money going to one already wealthy and connected person.
Me, I'd rather take my chance on handing it out in the form of numerous college scholarships than to give it to someone who may simply use it for a yacht or to bury it offshore.

[mnealtx 0]

1. The 'ultra rich' (as opposed to the 'merely rich') getting more of a benefit from things like dividend tax reductions != "tax system written to benefit the wealthy".

2. In case you hadn't noticed, it's the rich people that own the companies that create the jobs...

---

In 1924, Mellon noted: "The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business."

Detailed Internal Revenue Service data show that the across-the-board rate cuts of the early 1920s-including large cuts at the top end-resulted in greater tax payments and a larger tax share paid by those with high incomes. Figure 1 focuses on those earning more than $100,000. As the marginal tax rate on those high-income earners was cut sharply from 60 percent or more (to a maximum of 73 percent) to just 25 percent, taxes paid by that group soared from roughly $300 billion to $700 billion per year. The share of overall income taxes paid by the group rose from about one-third in the early 1920s to almost two-thirds by the late 1920s. (Note that inflation was virtually zero between 1922 and 1930, thus the tax amounts shown for that period are essentially real changes).

The tax cuts allowed the U.S. economy to grow rapidly during the mid- and late-1920s. Between 1922 and 1929, real gross national product grew at an annual average rate of 4.7 percent and the unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent to 3.2 percent. The Mellon tax cuts restored incentives to work, save, and invest, and discouraged the use of tax shelters.

Information from the Cato Institute.

---

3. The tax cuts have the direct consequence of removing MILLIONS of lower earning families from the tax rolls - they owe NOTHING or get MORE back than what they paid in. In point of fact, with the latest Bush tax cut, roughly 50% of the country has NO tax liability. Of the rest of the people that DO file, the uppermost 50% of them pay 97% of the total income tax.

So, please... explain just HOW the taxes are set up to benefit the rich.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

>From which half of him? His white half or his black half? Maybe his
>white half hates his black half or vice versa.

I've known you for a while on here, and usually you're above such comments.

Perhaps you're right. I probably did drop my standards a few levels.

The truth is, Obama scares me. As a Catholic (Sorry, I can't seperate the two), his stand on partial birth abortion is just unacceptable to me. In regard to the economy, at a time when the middle class is beginning to really feel the pinch through rising gas prices, heating oil, food prices, etc.; he wants to tax the middle class more.

I was recently speaking to a woman who works in my county's sheriff's office. Keep in mind, I live in Obama territory. She told me that the county's food pantry's cannot keep up with the demand anymore. Why? Because it is not only the poor coming in but also the middle class in droves. What she is hearing from the middle class is that if they don't get their food from the pantry's, they can't afford gasoline or heating oil.

This country is in serious trouble financially. Place the blame where you wish. Do I think McCain will solve the problem? Most likely not, but atleast he won't support increased taxes and partial birth abortion.

_________________________________________
Chris

[crwtom 0]

Quote

have to do an end program and IE shuts down and I loose my typing. OS is Windows XP

yeah - I also have to regularly loosen up while typing into an IE. That piece of #*!@# browser always gets my fingers all tensed up.

Cheers T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[billvon 3,119]

>Because it is not only the poor coming in but also the middle class in droves.

People making more than $50K a year can't afford food? I tend to doubt that. I mean, there are no doubt people who bought houses they couldn't afford and SUV's they can't fuel and are now suffering - but that's because they foolishly wasted their money, not because $50K a year won't buy enough food to keep them from starving.

>What she is hearing from the middle class is that if they don't get
>their food from the pantry's, they can't afford gasoline or heating oil.

Yep. And the solution, IMO, is to offer them solutions to their gas and/or oil problems so they can afford to feed themselves. We've had 30 years to do so and we still have done next to nothing. It's time to change that. I don't think "more of the same" is going to work any more.

I don't agree with all of Obama's positions either, and I disagree with him on partial birth abortion as well. But we have to start solving our problems - and McCain is much more likely to fight tooth and nail for the status quo than for those solutions.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

This country is in serious trouble financially. Place the blame where you wish. Do I think McCain will solve the problem? Most likely not, but atleast he won't support increased taxes and partial birth abortion.

Instead he'll continue the same policies that put us in our current state.

Yeah, that'll work.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

My point is that the tax system is written to benefit the wealthy and that quoting tax rates is deceiving.

Deceiving is claiming that marginal tax brackets are confusing. There's nothing confusing about it, nor that the upper deciles are paying all the taxes. It's especially odd to say the tax system favors the rich when the medium tax bill is zero. It favors the hell out of the less prosperous.

My marginal rate right now is right about 45%. Add in my 401k deductions, and it exceeds 50%. Those you speak up aren't remotely close to that rate.

At the very wealthy level, the lower rates for dividends and capital gains, as well as the reduced influence of the social security tax kick in. However, SS is already a lousy deal for the upper middle class on, and the others are sound policy. Does Buffet make billions doing day trading, and margining his house on Bear Stearns or the MS-Yahoo merger? Not a chance. He makes money the classic buy and hold way, the way that is best for the markets and economy. One reason why the tax policy favors long term holders. Tax policy could be improved if mutual funds were treated the same as equities. This is a mild discrimination against middle class investors - avoided if they only use mutuals for IRAs and 401k.

The key complaint that can be legitimately made is that the taxpayers should be paying the full bill (or put more aptly, that the government should only spend what it gets). If the marginal rate was still 70%, maybe they'd have more. Certainly they shouldn't couple big tax cuts with big spending increases.

If DC spent what it takes, or takes what it spends, the upper 50% will actively voice what they are willing to pay for. Right now, they get a bit of a free ride, as do the 50% paying nothing.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Firefox's approach is a better one - I think it's a good choice to use.

Is Firefox's spell check integrated into the application or via plugin?

Personally, I like the global approach so that it's always on when I'm typing and all applications use the same dictionary. But, to each their own. If you prefer each application implementing its own spell check, do it that way. Judging by your posts, misspelled words are not a significant issue, however you avoid them.

The errors I'm most likely to make won't be caught by spell checkers. I'll type half the sentence, then revise the sentence structure in my mind and change, but miss a link. One two letter word from the first sentence survives to the new one. Or too often, the added or missing not modifier.

At home I have firefox - the check is built in, not a plugin. Any words in text boxes are underlined when it suspects a problem. At work I rely on IE, not so good for this.

OSX has an advantage in the close tie ins to the OS for basic tools and functions. With MS, you get this within Office (for better or worse), but a lot of the litigation against the company has centered on the bundling of services into the OS to put smaller companies out of business. Or putting that aside - many of us don't trust them to get a damn thing right.

[mnealtx 0]

Well said...especially the part about controlling spending, which is something NEITHER side of the aisle is good on.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Because it is not only the poor coming in but also the middle class in droves.

People making more than $50K a year can't afford food? I tend to doubt that. I mean, there are no doubt people who bought houses they couldn't afford and SUV's they can't fuel and are now suffering - but that's because they foolishly wasted their money, not because $50K a year won't buy enough food to keep them from starving.

People need to start evaluating what they considering their minimum expenses - the $100/month cable bill, the same for the cellphone with unnecessary add ons. I think the DSL cost is one of the best returns on value, but that's also less important than food, unless your job requires it (and then ask them to pay). That HDTV you had to buy gets some pretty good channels if you live within the reach of the TV signals, and that's free.

And yes, the new SUV over a used volvo wagon - the car shouldn't represent a huge chunk of the monthly cost. Until my subaru needed a engine replacement (damn crappy gaskets), it had cost me less than 100/month for 3 years (insurance, title, gas, maintenance). Unfortunately, that was a $3800 hit, but that will still only end up being a $100/mo add-on cost for the next 2 years at which point I expect to sell it.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

She told me that the county's food pantry's cannot keep up with the demand anymore. Why? Because it is not only the poor coming in but also the middle class in droves. What she is hearing from the middle class is that if they don't get their food from the pantry's, they can't afford gasoline or heating oil.

Don't they have some sort of maximum income level for who they will provide food for? Anyone who is considered "middle class" should not be getting food from food pantries. If they are unable to manage their finances, then what they need is a financial advisor rather than charity.

[Muenkel 0]

I'm just passing on what this woman told me. The only times I have ever been in a food pantry was to donate food. I don't look around and make an assumption about the folks getting their food there.

Bill, Just so you understand, the area I live in is quite mountainous with a relatively small town 23 miles away. The folks have to use cars to go to town and they have to use more than the average amount of gasoline.

Also, I know you live in San Diego, so it puzzles me how you would think $50K/yr is middle class. It certainly isn't where I live. I would put it more in the lower middle class.

_________________________________________
Chris

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

>From which half of him? His white half or his black half? Maybe his
>white half hates his black half or vice versa.

I've known you for a while on here, and usually you're above such comments.

I thought you were making a joke. I think sometimes around here we take this stuff too seriously.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[billvon 3,119]

>Just so you understand, the area I live in is quite mountainous with a
>relatively small town 23 miles away. The folks have to use cars to go to
>town and they have to use more than the average amount of gasoline.

OK. Geo Metros cost around $2K used (for a 1995) and get well over 40mpg. That's less than $4 per trip.

>Also, I know you live in San Diego, so it puzzles me how you would think
> $50K/yr is middle class.

I guess it's all in how you see yourself. When I moved to San Diego in 1994 I made $25K a year (about $35K a year in 2008 dollars) and I didn't consider myself "lower middle class." I couldn't go out every night, I had to work at the DZ to afford to jump and I had to share a house, but I always had enough to eat, and I had fun.

And to me, a single guy who can afford to skydive, who can go out on Friday nights and who can afford a used car is solidly middle class. Maybe I "settle for less" or something though.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Also, I know you live in San Diego, so it puzzles me how you would think
> $50K/yr is middle class.

I guess it's all in how you see yourself. When I moved to San Diego in 1994 I made $25K a year (about $35K a year in 2008 dollars) and I didn't consider myself "lower middle class." I couldn't go out every night, I had to work at the DZ to afford to jump and I had to share a house, but I always had enough to eat, and I had fun.

And to me, a single guy who can afford to skydive, who can go out on Friday nights and who can afford a used car is solidly middle class. Maybe I "settle for less" or something though.

Definitely for a single guy, 50k is doing just fine. I was able to buy a new car (even though that's stupid financially) and engage in substantial amounts of scuba diving, hiking, a motorcycle. I had to give on the housing - rented a room from a couple of postdocs.

Now for a family, esp if both actually need a vehicle, or if childcare is part of the equation, 50k is pretty scant. One estimate for the bay area puts 72k as the minimum for a family of 4.

[DSE 5]

Quote

I'm just passing on what this woman told me. The only times I have ever been in a food pantry was to donate food. I don't look around and make an assumption about the folks getting their food there.

I pass the pantry line every Friday morning...for years, the vehicle line never extended past the church parking lot (it's not a church that gives out the food, it's just that they have a large lot for the distribution trucks to park) but nowadays...the line is always well out of the church and into the highway berm for a quarter mile or so. I see "regular" or "middle class" people going to the food bank, nicely if not in average clothing. It's not just the overweight, spandex-clad women in curlers waddling up to the trucks any more. Part of my significant other's work responsibility is assisting people in getting off food stamps and assistance. She tells me the median has significantly risen, and the state is going to be in trouble soon due to all the new applicants.
Worse, our county is the largest in the state, one of the largest in the US, with a very small population. Most folks drive long distances to work as there is no longer sufficient employment since the military base closed its main mission. None of the candidates seem to be willing to address the reality of the economy head-on. My choice is Obama or McCain, and if McCain selects Romney as his running mate, he's left me no choice. I don't care about Obama's skin color, I care about his messaging, and it's too glib for me. I like some of what he says, but the lack of deep substance worries me. McCain has more substance, but doesn't go where I'd like to hear him go.
They're both so filled with generalities...they could be completely interchangeable.
Then there's Hillary....I'd just as soon vote for a real lame duck.

[billvon 3,119]

>Now for a family, esp if both actually need a vehicle, or if childcare is
>part of the equation, 50k is pretty scant. One estimate for the bay area
>puts 72k as the minimum for a family of 4.

Agreed. If you want to own two cars, live far from work, live in one of the most expensive areas on the planet and hire someone to watch your kids, you need more than $50K. If you don't make that much, choosing a cheaper lifestyle might be a good idea.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

I am not sure what is up with the one machine I use. When I try and fire up spell check the window shows "aboutblank" up in the corner the then I have to do an end program and IE shuts down and I loose my typing. OS is Windows XP

A search of Version Tracker revealed TinySpell and FreeSpell as freeware options among many shareware (usually very low cost) and commercial options.

I'm pretty sure Firefox has either integrated spellcheck or a plug-in available. Apple's Safari for Windows includes spelling and grammar check. Both browsers are free downloads.

Thanks
I will check it out.

If I do will I not be allowed to misspell anything ever again?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Now for a family, esp if both actually need a vehicle, or if childcare is
>part of the equation, 50k is pretty scant. One estimate for the bay area
>puts 72k as the minimum for a family of 4.

Agreed. If you want to own two cars, live far from work, live in one of the most expensive areas on the planet and hire someone to watch your kids, you need more than $50K. If you don't make that much, choosing a cheaper lifestyle might be a good idea.

The 72k value did not presume all of these factors.

Childcare for dual income families dwarfs the car expense. It seems like a messed up situation to be in -you can't make it on just one income, but if the second person works, most of their income goes to taxes, childcare, and travel costs.

[idrankwhat 0]

Maybe I should rephrase, the tax system is set up to benefit the wealthiest of the wealthy and consequently, the politically connected. I gave you an example of how Bush 43 made his money off of a $200 million tax subsidy and eminent domain seizures. Steinbrenner did the same thing but his profiteering off of the taxpayer was closer to $600 million (or $450 million, I can't recall at the moment). In both instances public and private land was taken from the taxpayer as well as the taxpayer funds necessary to build the facilities and funneled into the pockets of the new owners. In addition, big box stores that are built using tax increment financing essentially put the sales tax for each sale into their own profits because it doesn't go to the locality.
These are only a couple of examples. I would and will write more when I get some more time.
Busy couple of days and a boogie on deck.

[kelpdiver 2]

I don't see those as cases where the 'tax system' favors the ultra wealthy. These are deal between individuals and cities.

Cities seem convinced that they need pro teams and that giving them a new stadium is required. It's not. SF said hell no to the Giants and they eventually built their own stadium with private funding. (Yes, there is some indirect benefits, but it wasn't a half billion dollar giveaway)

The 49ers are fishing for free money for over a decade now but still hunting, still idly threatening to move.

Why would a city give up a lot of the sale tax for a Walmart? Jobs. Again, it may be a poor decision, esp when none of the jobs provide health care. But this isn't the tax system, this is city policians making a deal.