No.

Also, just got my 401K statement, lost 20% of my fund. Yes, I realize that ups and downs happen and it's over the long term that counts, but... Damn.

hang them

Algebrat: Snow Monkey: No.

Also, just got my 401K statement, lost 20% of my fund. Yes, I realize that ups and downs happen and it's over the long term that counts, but... Damn.

From when? The DOW and SPX are back up to even for 2011. You must have been really tech-heavy.

SPX was down about 16% for Q2 which was probably the period he's referring to (is up about 7% since 9/30)

Debeo Summa Credo: Algebrat: Snow Monkey: No.

Also, just got my 401K statement, lost 20% of my fund. Yes, I realize that ups and downs happen and it's over the long term that counts, but... Damn.

From when? The DOW and SPX are back up to even for 2011. You must have been really tech-heavy.

SPX was down about 16% for Q2 which was probably the period he's referring to (is up about 7% since 9/30)

I think it was for Q2 but can't say for sure since it's at home and i'm at work. Also, i'm too lazy/apathetic to go find it online.

They hold quite a bit of the responsibility for the whole 99% movement coming to be, at the very least. That said, I hope anyone supporting the movement who has a 401k understands what would happen to their 401k balance in the event they actually accomplish some of their goals. Don't get me wrong, I'm especially hopeful that Glass-Steagall gets reinstated and the whole concept of "Too big to fail" gets smashed into the ground, but if you think for a second that any additional taxes on corporations would be anything but passed along to the consumer, you are clueless.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." - Jesus Christ


Our Lord and Savior was very clear about this. These idolators will burn in hell for eternity for their unbridled avarice.

Oh boo hoo, you'll only get a $20,000 bonus this year.

Average compensation for Goldman Sachs employees through the first 9 months of 2011 dropped to $293k. The average was $370k for the first 9 months of 2010.

This is why the economy is still in the shiatter. The top 1% simply aren't making as much these days so the trick-down effect is much weaker. If we would focus on increasing their salaries, we'll all be much better off.

Farkn Yaj Yenrac: Don't get me wrong, I'm especially hopeful that Glass-Steagall gets reinstated and the whole concept of "Too big to fail" gets smashed into the ground, but if you think for a second that any additional taxes on corporations would be anything but passed along to the consumer, you are clueless.

I don't understand why people believe taxes have anything to really do with the cost of goods and services. If corporations could get more money by raising prices, they would have already have done so, but the reality is that raising the price means less customers which means less net revenue.

Taxes on corporations are mostly based on profit, so it isn't even factored into the cost of product, and raising the price just means less profit which does mean less taxes, but no corporation is going to avoid making a profit just so they can pay less taxes. The only reason corporations exist is to make a profit.

Is there another company on this planet that has done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit than Goldman Sachs?

WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Is there another company on this planet that has done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit than Goldman Sachs?

Gwyrddu: Farkn Yaj Yenrac: Don't get me wrong, I'm especially hopeful that Glass-Steagall gets reinstated and the whole concept of "Too big to fail" gets smashed into the ground, but if you think for a second that any additional taxes on corporations would be anything but passed along to the consumer, you are clueless.

I don't understand why people believe taxes have anything to really do with the cost of goods and services. If corporations could get more money by raising prices, they would have already have done so, but the reality is that raising the price means less customers which means less net revenue.

Taxes on corporations are mostly based on profit, so it isn't even factored into the cost of product, and raising the price just means less profit which does mean less taxes, but no corporation is going to avoid making a profit just so they can pay less taxes. The only reason corporations exist is to make a profit.

I apologize if I'm misunderstanding you but are you really claiming taxes aren't even factored into the cost of a product? If so, you are either incredibly misinformed or incredibly naive. It is something you have to pay in order to put your product on the market, therefore it is a cost.
Also, taxes on corporations are based on lots of things besides profit, sales taxes and payroll taxes off the top of my head. And who said anything about avoiding a profit to pay less taxes? Of course, corporations do exactly that with bonuses, capital expenditures, etc., but I don't think that was what you were getting at.
Finally, the only reason corporations exist is to protect the stockholders personal assets. Profits were being made long before corporations existed.

arcas: This is why the economy is still in the shiatter. The top 1% simply aren't making as much these days so the trick-down effect is much weaker. If we would focus on increasing their salaries, we'll all be much better off.



Its actually because Jim Bob from Fayettville didn't win the lottery, which would have resulted in tons of people being able to get jobs at the Rolex factory to meet the trickle-down demand.

Snow Monkey: Debeo Summa Credo: Algebrat: Snow Monkey: No.

Also, just got my 401K statement, lost 20% of my fund. Yes, I realize that ups and downs happen and it's over the long term that counts, but... Damn.

From when? The DOW and SPX are back up to even for 2011. You must have been really tech-heavy.

SPX was down about 16% for Q2 which was probably the period he's referring to (is up about 7% since 9/30)

I think it was for Q2 but can't say for sure since it's at home and i'm at work. Also, i'm too lazy/apathetic to go find it online.

Whoops, I meant Q3 and trust you probably did too.

Farkn Yaj Yenrac: Farkn Yaj Yenrac:
I apologize if I'm misunderstanding you but are you really claiming taxes aren't even factored into the cost of a product? If so, you are either incredibly misinformed or incredibly naive. It is something you have to pay in order to put your product on the market, therefore it is a cost.
Also, taxes on corporations are based on lots of things besides profit, sales taxes and payroll taxes off the top of my head. And who said anything about avoiding a profit to pay less taxes? Of course, corporations do exactly that with bonuses, capital expenditures, etc., but I don't think that was what you were getting at.
Finally, the only reason corporations exist is to protect the stockholders personal assets. Profits were being made long before corporations existed.

I'm talking about corporate taxes, as I believed that was what you were referencing when you said "taxes on corporations". Sales tax does increase the price of goods and services, but I believe that is more as a tax on consumers than corporations. And payroll taxes do increase the cost of labor, but corporations aren't the only ones paying such taxes.

Also, investing in infrastructures or personnel isn't the same as not making a profit, it is just taking your profit and using it to make more profit in the future. Saying that the reason corporations exist is to protect the stockholders personal assets is technically true in the same way that the civil war was about states right. It is definitely part of it, but corporations ultimate purpose is as a vehicle to make profit, which they do partly by protecting stockholders assets as you mentioned. Whether or not there are other methods to make a profit or even protect investors is irrelevant to the existence of corporations.

And I know I'm simplifying the relationship a little between taxes and prices, there is the Price elasticity of demand (new window), but I find blanket statements about how we can't ever raise corporate taxes or whatever taxes are imposed will immediately be reflected in the price of products to be nonsense, especially when considering any number of corporations making record profits.

You said you didn't understand why people think taxes have anything to do with the cost of goods and services. I'm saying that businesses only look at taxes as a cost.

And yes the only reason corporations exist is to become a "person" to protect the shareholders. If it weren't for taxes and liabilities there would be no reason for corporations to exist as a concept. Corporations and business are similar but separate things. Any for profit business exists only as a vehicle to make money.

WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Is there another company on this planet that has done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit than Goldman Sachs?

Monsanto?

Congress?

GE?

JustFark: WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Is there another company on this planet that has done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit than Goldman Sachs?

Monsanto?

Congress?

GE?

I'm going to disagree with you on all three.

Monsanto - Despite being evil as hell, they actually have physical products they sell. Granted how they do all that other stuff is evil as hell.

Congress - Not a company. They have done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit, but they are not actually a company.

GE - Not paying taxes is evil. Making physical products to sell is much less evil.

Goldman Sachs doesn't actually make anything. They make money from money. It doesn't provide any real product.

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Snow Monkey: No.

Also, just got my 401K statement, lost 20% of my fund. Yes, I realize that ups and downs happen and it's over the long term that counts, but... Damn.

It is at this point in time that I'd like us all to remember when the GOP thought it would be a great idea to take all of our Social Security money and have people invest it directly into the market.

Selling people on the notion that 401Ks == Great Retirement was a whole lot easier during the 90's tech boom.

I don't think a 401K is a great retirement, I think it's supposed to help subsidize my retirement unless I get extremely lucky & the market (and my 401K with it) booms right as/after I retire.

To be honest, I think i'll be lucky to live to hit my 60th birthday, so it doesn't bother me that much, but I like the illusion of being able to retire someday. I don't blame it on the GOP or Democrats in particular, it's just the way the USA is right now.

Also, as above notes, it was the 3Q statement. Pretty much everyone in my company who has a 401K through the company lost the same percentage +/- some depending on which of the five 'investment strategies' that are offered that they are in.

/saw a few unhappy Facebook comments from coworkers about it

Benni K Rok: JustFark: WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Is there another company on this planet that has done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit than Goldman Sachs?

Monsanto?

Congress?

GE?

I'm going to disagree with you on all three.

Monsanto - Despite being evil as hell, they actually have physical products they sell. Granted how they do all that other stuff is evil as hell.

Congress - Not a company. They have done more to screw over the population at large for their own benefit, but they are not actually a company.

GE - Not paying taxes is evil. Making physical products to sell is much less evil.

Goldman Sachs doesn't actually make anything. They make money from money. It doesn't provide any real product.

As far as I am concerned, they are simple a wealth transfer organization... transferring the wealth from the rest of us to themselves by manipulating a rigged system.

Seriously, what possible value does microsecond automated trading deliver to the world? Its nothing more than rigging the game. All the money they make doesn't come from thin air, its taken from someone else.