Howie Schwab Laid Off

I honestly believe that if this trend continues, we will have a revolution in this country within the next 25 years. When people become disenfranchised, they have nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

From this day forward I will now think of Panther2 as " Che Panthera " :)
Click to expand...

Viva La Revolucion!

---(And now I await a visit from the NSA)
Click to expand...
They will be there in a little while. They are busy waterboarding panther2 right now.
Click to expand...

They have their hands full with Joe3.
 
The problem is a lot of people running these companies are clueless. ESPN overbid for the ACC television rights, encouraged the breakup of the Big East, and is now laying off employees to make up the difference. The fact was stated earlier, we can lay an older employee off and replace him with someone lee expensive. Trying to save money by getting rid of employees and pushing up executive salaries is the norm.
In the 1970's, I worked in the Queens Business Service Center for New York Telephone Co. It was a good job with decent benefits. They also had a residential Service Center in the same building on 165th St. in Jamaica. As a representative, it was our responsibility to help customers with any problems they had. We also took orders to install or replace equipment. Two months ago, a truck passed in front of my house and knocked down the telephone lines knocking out my service. When my wife called the phone company, she ended up speaking to someone who was located in the Phillipenes. This is why there is so much unemployment in this country, everything is being outsourced. Greed is killing us, those who have are not satisfied, they just want more, no matter who gets harmed along the way.
About 12 years ago, the president of Goldman Sachs laid off almost 1,000 administrative employees who had been with the company for 15 years or more in order to cut costs. At the end of the year he received a 10 million dollar bonus for a job well done. This just does not make sense.
In Texas, the legislature passed a law that state agencies would be required to buy American made products when the cost is the same and they are as good as foreign made products. This was something that Democrats and Republicans agreed upon. The governor wants to veto the bill due to influence from companies who have their products made overseas. This is totally ridiculous.
I honestly believe that if this trend continues, we will have a revolution in this country within the next 25 years. When people become disenfranchised, they have nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

Panther,

Your comment about greed killing us, I agree with. However, the way I read it, and I aplogize if I misinterpreted it, is that the upper class/upper management are the only ones guilty of greed. Greed is something that haunts all of us, regardless of social class. Jobs are outsourced because labor is cheaper. That is a fact. One of the reasons labor is cheaper is because middle class people are wanting/demanding more money because they say the cost of living is higher. While that is true, they always seem to fail to consider the lifestyles and spending habits that they partake in. It seems that in many cases, each family member has their own car, every child has their own cell phones, computers, ipods, etc. We as a society need to really sit back and look at the difference between 'need' and 'want'. Jobs are also outsourced because we as a country have developed a strong sense of 'entitlement'. There aren't too many people out there who are willing to go to work for minimum wage. They feel that they are better than those wages, and refuse to work for those wages. So what other option do businesses have?

Another comment that I do not agree with is your reference to the President of Goldman Sachs receiving a $10M bonus, and that not making sense. From a strictly business point of view, that makes absolute perfect sense....just do the math. If 1,000 employees are making a salary of about $30,000/yr ( and that is probably really lowballing it), the company is paying out $30million/year, not including benefits. By getting rid of those employees and paying a 1x bonus, they are saving $20million the first year, and every year after that where a bonus is not being paid, they are saving 100% of whatever they were paying those employees.
 
Panther,
Your comment about greed killing us, I agree with. However, the way I read it, and I aplogize if I misinterpreted it, is that the upper class/upper management are the only ones guilty of greed. Greed is something that haunts all of us, regardless of social class. Jobs are outsourced because labor is cheaper. That is a fact. One of the reasons labor is cheaper is because middle class people are wanting/demanding more money because they say the cost of living is higher. While that is true, they always seem to fail to consider the lifestyles and spending habits that they partake in. It seems that in many cases, each family member has their own car, every child has their own cell phones, computers, ipods, etc. We as a society need to really sit back and look at the difference between 'need' and 'want'. Jobs are also outsourced because we as a country have developed a strong sense of 'entitlement'. There aren't too many people out there who are willing to go to work for minimum wage. They feel that they are better than those wages, and refuse to work for those wages. So what other option do businesses have?

Another comment that I do not agree with is your reference to the President of Goldman Sachs receiving a $10M bonus, and that not making sense. From a strictly business point of view, that makes absolute perfect sense....just do the math. If 1,000 employees are making a salary of about $30,000/yr ( and that is probably really lowballing it), the company is paying out $30million/year, not including benefits. By getting rid of those employees and paying a 1x bonus, they are saving $20million the first year, and every year after that where a bonus is not being paid, they are saving 100% of whatever they were paying those employees.
Click to expand...

I believe in the free market and minimal government interference in both individuals and business. The question is however if you want to contrast say the middle class vs mercenary CEOs: Where do you draw the line in free market thinking? If it is a matter of a sense of entitlement as you state, how do you contrast accurately? The assumption in your logic to determine the quality of a CEO, is that you can create a simple balance sheet approach, (just do the math) end of discussion. While most people who have run a company would agree that that doesn't work for anything but the short term, because there are other factors that go into say client retention, brand, customer acquisition, talent retention...
Regardless of that however, the question is, is there anything beyond the math? Do companies have a responsibility to society for example or are they entitled to just act without regard? Collectively our taxes pay for national security, roads etc and all of the things that make for a conducive environment for business. So the thinking behind your approach is actually one of entitlement. The assumption is that, corporations and the individual owners, management and other decision makers, are entitled to all of the things that our taxes pay for and that the citizens creates through both their labor and through their ongoing choice to live within the norms and laws of our society. These CEOs are entitled to operate in a completely mercenary fashion and in fact the individuals that do so should be financially rewarded even when their actions cause massive stress to the larger economy and to the economy of individuals and families. If an average middle class (make that lower class because there is almost no middle class any more) citizen acts in such a fashion he goes to prison, gets sued, publicly shamed whatever. Why is Goldman Sachs so entitled?
 
The problem is a lot of people running these companies are clueless. ESPN overbid for the ACC television rights, encouraged the breakup of the Big East, and is now laying off employees to make up the difference. The fact was stated earlier, we can lay an older employee off and replace him with someone lee expensive. Trying to save money by getting rid of employees and pushing up executive salaries is the norm.
In the 1970's, I worked in the Queens Business Service Center for New York Telephone Co. It was a good job with decent benefits. They also had a residential Service Center in the same building on 165th St. in Jamaica. As a representative, it was our responsibility to help customers with any problems they had. We also took orders to install or replace equipment. Two months ago, a truck passed in front of my house and knocked down the telephone lines knocking out my service. When my wife called the phone company, she ended up speaking to someone who was located in the Phillipenes. This is why there is so much unemployment in this country, everything is being outsourced. Greed is killing us, those who have are not satisfied, they just want more, no matter who gets harmed along the way.
About 12 years ago, the president of Goldman Sachs laid off almost 1,000 administrative employees who had been with the company for 15 years or more in order to cut costs. At the end of the year he received a 10 million dollar bonus for a job well done. This just does not make sense.
In Texas, the legislature passed a law that state agencies would be required to buy American made products when the cost is the same and they are as good as foreign made products. This was something that Democrats and Republicans agreed upon. The governor wants to veto the bill due to influence from companies who have their products made overseas. This is totally ridiculous.
I honestly believe that if this trend continues, we will have a revolution in this country within the next 25 years. When people become disenfranchised, they have nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

Panther,

Your comment about greed killing us, I agree with. However, the way I read it, and I aplogize if I misinterpreted it, is that the upper class/upper management are the only ones guilty of greed. Greed is something that haunts all of us, regardless of social class. Jobs are outsourced because labor is cheaper. That is a fact. One of the reasons labor is cheaper is because middle class people are wanting/demanding more money because they say the cost of living is higher. While that is true, they always seem to fail to consider the lifestyles and spending habits that they partake in. It seems that in many cases, each family member has their own car, every child has their own cell phones, computers, ipods, etc. We as a society need to really sit back and look at the difference between 'need' and 'want'. Jobs are also outsourced because we as a country have developed a strong sense of 'entitlement'. There aren't too many people out there who are willing to go to work for minimum wage. They feel that they are better than those wages, and refuse to work for those wages. So what other option do businesses have?

Another comment that I do not agree with is your reference to the President of Goldman Sachs receiving a $10M bonus, and that not making sense. From a strictly business point of view, that makes absolute perfect sense....just do the math. If 1,000 employees are making a salary of about $30,000/yr ( and that is probably really lowballing it), the company is paying out $30million/year, not including benefits. By getting rid of those employees and paying a 1x bonus, they are saving $20million the first year, and every year after that where a bonus is not being paid, they are saving 100% of whatever they were paying those employees.
Click to expand...

I think there should be restrictions so that so many jobs cannot be outsourced and all the billionaires cannot dock their yachts or have their businesses registered in the Bahamas to avoid taxation. I remember being in FL looking at $200 million dollar yachts owned by Microsoft big wigs on a tour and the tour guide always said "this too is registered overseas, again so they don't have to pay taxes here" and the same is true with businesses. It's sickening...such an easy escape, yet the country does nothing even when we can use every penny of tax money to rebuild roads, bridges, tunnels, and god forbid high speed rail like every other damn first world nation. The streets are crumbling, bridges are falling apart, and it takes 1 hour 20 minutes to go a mere 50 miles on the LIRR. In Japan that would probably take you 45 minutes. It just seems that there are different sets of rules for the super rich. I mean, was one guy ever jailed for all the corruption on wall street that partially led us to the collapse? Nope. If me or you did anything like that, you will live in prison most of your life.

Here on Long Island Grumman is about to be gone. Yes, the same company that produced the Lunar Module, the F-14 Tomcat, etc. is being taken off the island. Why? They want cheaper taxes to house their facilities instead of Nassau. It's sad, but much like the abandonment from Cuse, Pitt, etc. everything just comes down to dollars and cents. Nothing else is considered.

Another huge issue is companies not being forced to use the E-Verify system to prevent companies from hiring illegal immigrants and receiving huge penalties if they do. Failure to install this simple and necessary system will just continue to lower wages and attract illegal immigrants which tax payers are footed the bill for including their children.
 
It just seems that there are different sets of rules for the super rich.
Click to expand...

Different rules for the rich you say. I've never thought about it that way but I think you might be onto something. It seems somewhat, I don't know, unfair I guess. You know what else and this really chafes my petunia come to think of it is that there are a different set of rules for women with enormous meat balloons. I mean know that when I go to the Fun Bags out by the airport I invariably tip the chesty dancers more generously that the skinny ones. That's just wrong and starting right now it's going to change. Well, not right now, I'm home now, but the next time I'm out there.


I mean, was one guy ever jailed for all the corruption on wall street that partially led us to the collapse?
Click to expand...

No, but one was elected governor. Did you vote for him?
 
It just seems that there are different sets of rules for the super rich.
Click to expand...

Different rules for the rich you say. I've never thought about it that way but I think you might be onto something. It seems somewhat, I don't know, unfair I guess. You know what else and this really chafes my petunia come to think of it is that there are a different set of rules for women with enormous meat balloons. I mean know that when I go to the Fun Bags out by the airport I invariably tip the chesty dancers more generously that the skinny ones. That's just wrong and starting right now it's going to change. Well, not right now, I'm home now, but the next time I'm out there.


I mean, was one guy ever jailed for all the corruption on wall street that partially led us to the collapse?
Click to expand...

No, but one was elected governor. Did you vote for him?
Click to expand...

Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
 
Some great thoughts on the thread.

I dont want to get into CEO pay debate but realistically outsourcing isnt going to go away. ( as someone said before I think maybe Paul ) the middle class isnt just dwindling. It's becoming extinct. There are the haves and the have nots

2 things I could see to help the issue of outsourcing possible.

1. I'm seeing it right now with clients who own their own businesses and outsource. Let's use China for example. Textiles used to be real cheap in china and my clients have partners with factories over there. But the cost of labor is rising. Now they are moving to other countries. Vietnam,Indonesia actually even Peru which is Ironic because of Nathalie ). Anyway as their middle class grows similiar to how ours grew a long time ago things could end up getting to the point where it's just cheaper to build here and save on sending back here etc

2. With all this new energy discovery oil & nat gas I could definitely see a situation especially nat gas where companies move plant ops back here because the cost of energy is so much cheaper. I think nat gas is 1/2 of what it costs in europe. With companies that use heavy energy that could be huge savings so they dont mind paying higher salary costs.

But it is what it is. I see Newsies point but I also see Moose's point. A lot of companies see people as a number and if your number is high well that's not good. Younger employees though can also bring very strong skills especially with computers etc to the table and arent necessarily inferior to their older counterparts. Experience has to have value though also.

But I work in a business where you are only as good as your last year. You dont produce roi for clients you shouldnt get too comfortable

After 21 years I'm used to it but I'm sure that's why I take ambien some nights. lol
 
Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I was saying first that I like boobies, and second that your 'it's almost as if there are two sets of rules for the rich' was as epiphanic as 'it's almost as if the sun rises in the east.' Because of course there are a different set of rules for the super rich, that's why people go to all the trouble of becoming rich, so that they can play by another set of rules.

Regarding the "super rich" moving everything off shore, that's nonsense. The wealthy avoid paying taxes - to the the extent they do: the top 10 percent of wage earners pay 70 percent of taxes, which is about 30 percent of their annual income - by eschewing income in favor of gain and forming charitable foundations and creating trusts and a whole bunch of other ways permitted by the IRC, which is an abomination. They hire lawyers and accountants from the safety and security of Palm Beach and Malibu, they don't move to third world hamster in a wheel socialist hellholes, except Bebe Rebozo and Marc Rich.

There are exceptions of course. For example organized crime families like the Luccheses and Kennedys ship the proceeds of their criminal enterprises overseas - the Kennedy Family trust is situated in Fiji IIRC - but since their raison d'etre is the circumvention of the law, that's sort of a moot point. Others, like former Nazi collaborator George Soros, are simply evil, and if tax evasion is the worst they do we should consider ourselves lucky, at least he's no longer sending undesirables to Auschwitz, he's just manipulating the world energy market. Phew.

Here's something for you to chew on re the unfairness of it all: Most people most of the time for the whole of history have led brief brutal lives as slaves and serfs and cannon fodder and died savage horrifying deaths. The lucky ones were eaten by rats or wasted away from repulsive diseases; the unlucky ones were impaled, diced, disemboweled, roasted, flayed, boiled, hanged, quartered, or crucified and their corpses violated afterwards. Did you know that when the Huns came upon a child on the side of the road while laying waste to the country side once all of its holes were occupied they would make their own apertures with their daggers and make love to those before finally bashing the victim’s brains out against the side of a tree? Whereas you grew up on Long Island, where that happens rarely, and in such the lap of such luxury that you were able to figure out that life isn't fair, you can't quite suss out to whom.
 
Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I was saying first that I like boobies, and second that your 'it's almost as if there are two sets of rules for the rich' was as epiphanic as 'it's almost as if the sun rises in the east.' Because of course there are a different set of rules for the super rich, that's why people go to all the trouble of becoming rich, so that they can play by another set of rules.

Regarding the "super rich" moving everything off shore, that's nonsense. The wealthy avoid paying taxes - to the the extent they do: the top 10 percent of wage earners pay 70 percent of taxes, which is about 30 percent of their annual income - by eschewing income in favor of gain and forming charitable foundations and creating trusts and a whole bunch of other ways permitted by the IRC, which is an abomination. They hire lawyers and accountants from the safety and security of Palm Beach and Malibu, they don't move to third world hamster in a wheel socialist hellholes, except Bebe Rebozo and Marc Rich.

There are exceptions of course. For example organized crime families like the Luccheses and Kennedys ship the proceeds of their criminal enterprises overseas - the Kennedy Family trust is situated in Fiji IIRC - but since their raison d'etre is the circumvention of the law, that's sort of a moot point. Others, like former Nazi collaborator George Soros, are simply evil, and if tax evasion is the worst they do we should consider ourselves lucky, at least he's no longer sending undesirables to Auschwitz, he's just manipulating the world energy market. Phew.

Here's something for you to chew on re the unfairness of it all: Most people most of the time for the whole of history have led brief brutal lives as slaves and serfs and cannon fodder and died savage horrifying deaths. The lucky ones were eaten by rats or wasted away from repulsive diseases; the unlucky ones were impaled, diced, disemboweled, roasted, flayed, boiled, hanged, quartered, or crucified and their corpses violated afterwards. Did you know that when the Huns came upon a child on the side of the road while laying waste to the country side once all of its holes were occupied they would make their own apertures with their daggers and make love to those before finally bashing the victim’s brains out against the side of a tree? Whereas you grew up on Long Island, where that happens rarely, and in such the lap of such luxury that you were able to figure out that life isn't fair, you can't quite suss out to whom.
Click to expand...

Waited for the other shoe to fall and it was worth waiting for.
 
Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I was saying first that I like boobies, and second that your 'it's almost as if there are two sets of rules for the rich' was as epiphanic as 'it's almost as if the sun rises in the east.' Because of course there are a different set of rules for the super rich, that's why people go to all the trouble of becoming rich, so that they can play by another set of rules.

Regarding the "super rich" moving everything off shore, that's nonsense. The wealthy avoid paying taxes - to the the extent they do: the top 10 percent of wage earners pay 70 percent of taxes, which is about 30 percent of their annual income - by eschewing income in favor of gain and forming charitable foundations and creating trusts and a whole bunch of other ways permitted by the IRC, which is an abomination. They hire lawyers and accountants from the safety and security of Palm Beach and Malibu, they don't move to third world hamster in a wheel socialist hellholes, except Bebe Rebozo and Marc Rich.

There are exceptions of course. For example organized crime families like the Luccheses and Kennedys ship the proceeds of their criminal enterprises overseas - the Kennedy Family trust is situated in Fiji IIRC - but since their raison d'etre is the circumvention of the law, that's sort of a moot point. Others, like former Nazi collaborator George Soros, are simply evil, and if tax evasion is the worst they do we should consider ourselves lucky, at least he's no longer sending undesirables to Auschwitz, he's just manipulating the world energy market. Phew.

Here's something for you to chew on re the unfairness of it all: Most people most of the time for the whole of history have led brief brutal lives as slaves and serfs and cannon fodder and died savage horrifying deaths. The lucky ones were eaten by rats or wasted away from repulsive diseases; the unlucky ones were impaled, diced, disemboweled, roasted, flayed, boiled, hanged, quartered, or crucified and their corpses violated afterwards. Did you know that when the Huns came upon a child on the side of the road while laying waste to the country side once all of its holes were occupied they would make their own apertures with their daggers and make love to those before finally bashing the victim’s brains out against the side of a tree? Whereas you grew up on Long Island, where that happens rarely, and in such the lap of such luxury that you were able to figure out that life isn't fair, you can't quite suss out to whom.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about charities or trusts or scholarships or anything like that. I'm talking about taxes. The 1% absolutely does not pay their fair share and most people realize it. What is the rate at now, 40%? You don't have to go too far back to when it was 80%. And the 1% was still able to keep their yachts and Gatsby mansions even with that rate. Now you should probably know that most of my views are conservative minus the fact that the top of the pyramid doesn't pay in proportion to what everyone else pays via tax evasion (offshore accounts and assets) and the fact that I'm an atheist. Some social issues I'm more liberal on. So don't think I'm some Bill Ayers daisy picking acid trip. I'm not going to lie and say I'm an expert but at the very least the top 1% does not pay in proportion. That was my point. Didn't Romney's secretary famously pay more in taxes than Romney recently?
 
Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I was saying first that I like boobies, and second that your 'it's almost as if there are two sets of rules for the rich' was as epiphanic as 'it's almost as if the sun rises in the east.' Because of course there are a different set of rules for the super rich, that's why people go to all the trouble of becoming rich, so that they can play by another set of rules.

Regarding the "super rich" moving everything off shore, that's nonsense. The wealthy avoid paying taxes - to the the extent they do: the top 10 percent of wage earners pay 70 percent of taxes, which is about 30 percent of their annual income - by eschewing income in favor of gain and forming charitable foundations and creating trusts and a whole bunch of other ways permitted by the IRC, which is an abomination. They hire lawyers and accountants from the safety and security of Palm Beach and Malibu, they don't move to third world hamster in a wheel socialist hellholes, except Bebe Rebozo and Marc Rich.

There are exceptions of course. For example organized crime families like the Luccheses and Kennedys ship the proceeds of their criminal enterprises overseas - the Kennedy Family trust is situated in Fiji IIRC - but since their raison d'etre is the circumvention of the law, that's sort of a moot point. Others, like former Nazi collaborator George Soros, are simply evil, and if tax evasion is the worst they do we should consider ourselves lucky, at least he's no longer sending undesirables to Auschwitz, he's just manipulating the world energy market. Phew.

Here's something for you to chew on re the unfairness of it all: Most people most of the time for the whole of history have led brief brutal lives as slaves and serfs and cannon fodder and died savage horrifying deaths. The lucky ones were eaten by rats or wasted away from repulsive diseases; the unlucky ones were impaled, diced, disemboweled, roasted, flayed, boiled, hanged, quartered, or crucified and their corpses violated afterwards. Did you know that when the Huns came upon a child on the side of the road while laying waste to the country side once all of its holes were occupied they would make their own apertures with their daggers and make love to those before finally bashing the victim’s brains out against the side of a tree? Whereas you grew up on Long Island, where that happens rarely, and in such the lap of such luxury that you were able to figure out that life isn't fair, you can't quite suss out to whom.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about charities or trusts or scholarships or anything like that. I'm talking about taxes. The 1% absolutely does not pay their fair share and most people realize it. What is the rate at now, 40%? You don't have to go too far back to when it was 80%. And the 1% was still able to keep their yachts and Gatsby mansions even with that rate. Now you should probably know that most of my views are conservative minus the fact that the top of the pyramid doesn't pay in proportion to what everyone else pays via tax evasion (offshore accounts and assets) and the fact that I'm an atheist. Some social issues I'm more liberal on. So don't think I'm some Bill Ayers daisy picking acid trip. I'm not going to lie and say I'm an expert but at the very least the top 1% does not pay in proportion. That was my point. Didn't Romney's secretary famously pay more in taxes than Romney recently?
Click to expand...

I can tell you one thing Joe, and I doubt i'm in the top 1%, but I pay full boat taxes with very few deductions, and when you add fed top bracket tax, NYS income tax, Property taxes, sales tax, I am at about 60%. Any profit my business makes gets taxed quarterly, and anything I net goes back into the business to support operations, give raises, etc. I'm not complaining much, and I started with zero with LESS THAN ZERO help from the government. It burns my ass that my taxes bailed out AIG, Bank of America and Citibank, and helped fund a worthless stimulus.
 
Fun, are you saying that the super rich should be able to avoid taxation by moving everything offshore? Don't you think they should have to pay taxes to the country that helped them become so successful in the first place?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. I was saying first that I like boobies, and second that your 'it's almost as if there are two sets of rules for the rich' was as epiphanic as 'it's almost as if the sun rises in the east.' Because of course there are a different set of rules for the super rich, that's why people go to all the trouble of becoming rich, so that they can play by another set of rules.

Regarding the "super rich" moving everything off shore, that's nonsense. The wealthy avoid paying taxes - to the the extent they do: the top 10 percent of wage earners pay 70 percent of taxes, which is about 30 percent of their annual income - by eschewing income in favor of gain and forming charitable foundations and creating trusts and a whole bunch of other ways permitted by the IRC, which is an abomination. They hire lawyers and accountants from the safety and security of Palm Beach and Malibu, they don't move to third world hamster in a wheel socialist hellholes, except Bebe Rebozo and Marc Rich.

There are exceptions of course. For example organized crime families like the Luccheses and Kennedys ship the proceeds of their criminal enterprises overseas - the Kennedy Family trust is situated in Fiji IIRC - but since their raison d'etre is the circumvention of the law, that's sort of a moot point. Others, like former Nazi collaborator George Soros, are simply evil, and if tax evasion is the worst they do we should consider ourselves lucky, at least he's no longer sending undesirables to Auschwitz, he's just manipulating the world energy market. Phew.

Here's something for you to chew on re the unfairness of it all: Most people most of the time for the whole of history have led brief brutal lives as slaves and serfs and cannon fodder and died savage horrifying deaths. The lucky ones were eaten by rats or wasted away from repulsive diseases; the unlucky ones were impaled, diced, disemboweled, roasted, flayed, boiled, hanged, quartered, or crucified and their corpses violated afterwards. Did you know that when the Huns came upon a child on the side of the road while laying waste to the country side once all of its holes were occupied they would make their own apertures with their daggers and make love to those before finally bashing the victim’s brains out against the side of a tree? Whereas you grew up on Long Island, where that happens rarely, and in such the lap of such luxury that you were able to figure out that life isn't fair, you can't quite suss out to whom.
Click to expand...

You made your point but you could have omitted the last paragraph.
 
I'm not talking about charities or trusts or scholarships or anything like that. I'm talking about taxes.
Click to expand...

Charitable donations, foundations and trusts are mechanisms the wealthy use to avoid paying taxes.


The 1% absolutely does not pay their fair share and most people realize it. What is the rate at now, 40%? You don't have to go too far back to when it was 80%. And the 1% was still able to keep their yachts and Gatsby mansions even with that rate.
Click to expand...

You are free to think its "fair" that the government confiscates 80 percent of your earnings. Should you ever have any I urge you to pay that amount. Personally I think that if the government confiscates 80 percent of the fruits of your labor you're 80 percent a slave.

Now you should probably know that most of my views
Click to expand...



Don't care.


the top of the pyramid doesn't pay in proportion to what everyone else pays via tax evasion (offshore accounts and assets) and the fact that I'm an atheist. Some social issues I'm more liberal on. So don't think I'm some Bill Ayers daisy picking acid trip. I'm not going to lie and say I'm an expert but at the very least the top 1% does not pay in proportion. That was my point.
Click to expand...

Here you are correct. The top 1 percent pays way more than their share

Top 1 percent

Average income: $1.4 million.

Average tax bill: $514,144.

Average tax rate: 35.5 percent.

Share of federal tax burden: 30.2 percent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/03/1-percent-taxes-2013_n_2802243.html

Didn't Romney's secretary famously pay more in taxes than Romney recently?
Click to expand...

No.
 
I'm not talking about charities or trusts or scholarships or anything like that. I'm talking about taxes.
Click to expand...

Charitable donations, foundations and trusts are mechanisms the wealthy use to avoid paying taxes.


The 1% absolutely does not pay their fair share and most people realize it. What is the rate at now, 40%? You don't have to go too far back to when it was 80%. And the 1% was still able to keep their yachts and Gatsby mansions even with that rate.
Click to expand...

You are free to think its "fair" that the government confiscates 80 percent of your earnings. Should you ever have any I urge you to pay that amount. Personally I think that if the government confiscates 80 percent of the fruits of your labor you're 80 percent a slave.

Now you should probably know that most of my views
Click to expand...



Don't care.


the top of the pyramid doesn't pay in proportion to what everyone else pays via tax evasion (offshore accounts and assets) and the fact that I'm an atheist. Some social issues I'm more liberal on. So don't think I'm some Bill Ayers daisy picking acid trip. I'm not going to lie and say I'm an expert but at the very least the top 1% does not pay in proportion. That was my point.
Click to expand...

Here you are correct. The top 1 percent pays way more than their share

Top 1 percent

Average income: $1.4 million.

Average tax bill: $514,144.

Average tax rate: 35.5 percent.

Share of federal tax burden: 30.2 percent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/03/1-percent-taxes-2013_n_2802243.html

Didn't Romney's secretary famously pay more in taxes than Romney recently?
Click to expand...

No.
Click to expand...

So you just admitted the tax rate was even lower than my estimate of 40 for the 1%. You do realize a few decades ago it was around 80% right? Now obviously you can make the argument "just because they can afford it doesn't make it right", but come on...these are people with 3rd and 4th houses, 3rd and 4th cars, and private jets. If it means they have to cut back their luxury by 1 private jet to help fund the very infrastructure that helped him become successful then why would anyone cry about it? You can't have the same tax rate for a social worker making 30k that you would a doctor making 200k or a pro ball player making tens of millions. As long as the proportion is the same, I have no complaints. The 1% is richer than ever before and the wage gap is the biggest in history. Boo hoo for Donald Trump, now he won't be able to purchase his 15th Ferrari. Who could possibly live a life with only 14 Ferrari's? Oh the horror.
 
There aren't many certainties in life.

One of which however is Joe taking a thread about Howie Schwab and hijacking into a socio-political debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top