If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Apple is so hip, they've been making up Irish-American corporations that reside in both countries yet pay taxes in neither. That's like...whoa, man. My mind just got blown by your bodacious use of tax loopholes   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 114
    More: Asinine, Apple Inc., United States, u.s. income tax, share buyback, income taxes  
•       •       •

7664 clicks; posted to Business » on 21 May 2013 at 10:05 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-05-21 08:53:08 AM
10 votes:
This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11
2013-05-21 10:14:11 AM
7 votes:

Pappy091: This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.


Bullshiat. GTFO, you watercarrying shill.
2013-05-21 10:21:14 AM
5 votes:
Misplaced Anger

Don't blame Apple's pencil whippers.

Blame Congress for Title 26 USC. Apple is using loopholes and accounting Congress made part of the Tax Code at Title 26.

Be angry at Congress.
2013-05-21 10:14:21 AM
5 votes:
Cook should just strip and drop a hot crackling shiat on the table while looking the lead of the panel in the eye and say "If you don't like it, change the law", then wipe with 100 dollar bills.
2013-05-21 10:07:54 AM
5 votes:
This is why I only use Samsung devices.  Their shell corporations are far superior and lower-priced than Apple shell corporations.

My preference of shell corporations is a unique statement of my personal brand identity and I have included these preferences as a part of my personality.
2013-05-21 09:33:41 AM
5 votes:
I'm sure this only relates to their ongoing concern about work conditions in their Chinese factories. They're still working so hard to correct the rampant abuses that their in-depth investigations uncovered in places like FoxConn, and what they're probably thinking is that when it's time to start spending some money on improving those factories and giving the employees something closer to a living wage that moves them beyond what are essentially slave conditions, it'll be good to have the money closer by. See, if the money was all the way in America, it would be harder to get it there than if it was already in a foreign country overseas. They should be lauded for their concerned efficiency.
2013-05-21 02:35:27 PM
4 votes:

JohnnyC: Oh look everyone! Pappy is here tell us how bad the rich have it. Oh please, Pappy... do it some more! Stand up for those poor, oppressed, sad, rich folks who so desperately need you to defend them. They're counting on you!


He sounds like the perfect worker...

llwproductions.files.wordpress.com

dailyreckoning.com
www.oftwominds.com
2013-05-21 10:34:06 AM
4 votes:

Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.


They're not the problem to the extent that they're just a byproduct of a system of taxation that's regressive beyond the point of upper middle / lower upper class, but they sure lobby like hell to keep things that way.
2013-05-21 10:28:58 AM
4 votes:

Pappy091: Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


Yay!...more income envy.

This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.

Why do people think that raising taxes is going to fix a rising multi-trillion dollar deficit. Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.


Not percentage wise.  And this isn't about rich people, it is about the biggest corporations in America that pay little to no tax yet they make billions of dollars.

Compare that to a small local store and the taxes they pay.

Go see what Delta or GE paid in taxes last year.
2013-05-21 10:20:38 AM
4 votes:

Pappy091: Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


Yay!...more income envy.

This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.

Why do people think that raising taxes is going to fix a rising multi-trillion dollar deficit. Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.


Gross, yes, percent?  Not even close skippy.

Even my own accountant told me that for my income bracket, being single, and dependent-less, I may as well just bend over the desk.
I unfortunately lack the means to setup corporations/trusts/offshores to hide my income.
2013-05-21 10:18:58 AM
4 votes:

Pappy091: Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


Yay!...more income envy.

This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.

Why do people think that raising taxes is going to fix a rising multi-trillion dollar deficit. Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.


This just in, rich people ON PAPER seemingly pay far more in taxes but have an army of accountants to find all the loopholes to bring that number way down.
2013-05-21 05:02:53 PM
3 votes:

Pappy091: pxlboy: Pappy091: AngryJailhouseFistfark: CrazyCracka420: It's the politicians who allow these loopholes to exist in the first place that are to blame.

THIS!

You so crazy, cracka.


The Farkers claiming how easy it is to be wealthy and successful remind me of the Tony Robbins sort who sell you books and seminars on how to be successful, and when you get there it's all smoke and mirrors about attitude and positive thinking and hard work and striving and self-sacrifice, but the reality is they refuse to accept that there's an enormous amount of luck involved.

For example, the kid who inherited the house, all paid off. Luck (and he knows it). I'll wager that Pappy and Phinn were not born in the ghetto, raised by their grandmothers while dad was in jail & mom was on and off the crack/smack/booze/etc, trying to function in a run-down urban school overrun with gangs and noise and crime. Effort, sure, but there's a whole lotta right place, right time. It doesn't matter how hard you work if the opportunity isn't there. Likewise, housing prices, and for fark's sake, the commodification of higher education has driven those costs through the roof. Kids saddled with so much debt. Sure, bold, tough Grandfatherly talk:

Live within your means;
Save regularly;

And don't have children. And find that one place where the cost of living is far lower than what they're paying you and pray they don't find out they can pay you less and you'll stay on. Oh, and if you're from a shiatty, depressed area where there used to be jobs until the factory packed up and moved to China, be ready to say goodbye to your (loser) family and never see them again because you damn sure can't afford to take them with you to your new job and efficiency apartment in Bootstrapville. And while you're at it, go ahead an invest in your company's 401k, because that matching pays off. In however many years it takes you to vest. So be prepared to give their matching funds back or pass on that better opportunity th ...


Hard work is a generic term. No one disagrees with hard work.

The general thought is that without a certain level of familial, social, and possibly even financial support. The useless platitudes of, "Work hard, bootstraps, etc" are just that -- platitudes.

That support network, the upbringing, the education, and what not are going to play a huge role. People are, in many ways, a product of their environment. To say that someone who didn't have the same level of nurturing and support is on a level playing with someone who did not is ludicrous.

"Why don't they just get a job"
"Why don't they just go to school?"
"Maybe they shouldn't have had kids so young"

And so on. Privilege takes itself for granted and too seriously. It forgets that not everyone starts at the same place. It forgets where it comes from and has the audacity to chastise others for not having it.

So yeah, to just blurt out, "Work hard and I'm sure something will happen" is empty and worthless.
2013-05-21 04:26:09 PM
3 votes:

CrazyCracka420: It's the politicians who allow these loopholes to exist in the first place that are to blame.


THIS!

You so crazy, cracka.


The Farkers claiming how easy it is to be wealthy and successful remind me of the Tony Robbins sort who sell you books and seminars on how to be successful, and when you get there it's all smoke and mirrors about attitude and positive thinking and hard work and striving and self-sacrifice, but the reality is they refuse to accept that there's an enormous amount of luck involved.

For example, the kid who inherited the house, all paid off. Luck (and he knows it). I'll wager that Pappy and Phinn were not born in the ghetto, raised by their grandmothers while dad was in jail & mom was on and off the crack/smack/booze/etc, trying to function in a run-down urban school overrun with gangs and noise and crime. Effort, sure, but there's a whole lotta right place, right time. It doesn't matter how hard you work if the opportunity isn't there. Likewise, housing prices, and for fark's sake, the commodification of higher education has driven those costs through the roof. Kids saddled with so much debt. Sure, bold, tough Grandfatherly talk:

Live within your means;
Save regularly;

And don't have children. And find that one place where the cost of living is far lower than what they're paying you and pray they don't find out they can pay you less and you'll stay on. Oh, and if you're from a shiatty, depressed area where there used to be jobs until the factory packed up and moved to China, be ready to say goodbye to your (loser) family and never see them again because you damn sure can't afford to take them with you to your new job and efficiency apartment in Bootstrapville. And while you're at it, go ahead an invest in your company's 401k, because that matching pays off. In however many years it takes you to vest. So be prepared to give their matching funds back or pass on that better opportunity that comes along because you don't want to lose those matching funds. And don't get sick or have any pre-existing medical conditions because your health insurance is tied to your job and every time you leave you'll have coverage gaps and other potential lags. And forget about straight commission gigs, unless you're really a gambler and don't plan on getting sick. Ever.

But be bold. Be your own boss. Put everything into that new business venture where you're providing Nonspecific Service to Nonspecific Market. Student loan payments be damned, they can wait until your gamble pays off.  Or doesn't. And that old car should keep running, because you bought it within your means and the guy said it was reliable. You'd have taken it to a mechanic, but, well, that would have exceeded your budget and by golly, you're not about to be saddled with more debt. Not on your schedule. Not on your program.

I am reminded of that Saturday Night Live HR satire video on sexual harassment.

Be Handsome Be Attractive
 Don't Be Unattractive
2013-05-21 12:29:02 PM
3 votes:

Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.

That wasn't my post. But it is true that our economy is 70% reliant on consumer spending. While corporate profits are at historic highs, wages are at historic lows. The middle class does not have any money to spend on things beyond necessities. As a result aggregate demand is suffering. So companies aren't hiring. So wages suffer even more. And on and on we go, down the spiral towards the bottom.

I believe it is a false belief that the middle class is suffering. Saying that they only have money to spend on necessities is just laughable in my opinion. Unless we have gotten to a point in our country where 52" flat screens and 2200 sq ft houses are "necessary".


http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-08-03/opinions/35491334_1_mi dd le-class-median-household-income-income-gains

FTA: "Wage levels in the middle and below have barely budged since the 1970s because of a barrage of shifts in our economy and economic institutions - from globalization and technological advances to the decline of unions and new corporate practices that emphasize value for shareholders. Most of the increase that did happen in middle-class incomes was not because of rising wages but because households added a second earner. "
2013-05-21 12:18:50 PM
3 votes:

Pappy091: Just look at the quality of life that the lower/middle classes have today compared to 50 years ago.


Hey what a coincidence, 40% of Americans now make less than the 1968 minimum wage. Things are totally better.

Pappy091: Redistribution of wealth is not the way to raise the lower/middle class


Sure it is. That's what taxes are, a redistribution of wealth. Those who have been successful need to pay back the country that facilitated their wealth. It's We the People, not Me the Person. I don't have kids, but I don't mind paying for public schools because it enhances the public good, and that's good for everybody - poor, middle, and rich.
2013-05-21 11:24:20 AM
3 votes:

Pappy091: I understand, but people need to blame the system, not the business. No one is going to voluntarily pay more taxes just because.

My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.


Actually, as a whole, they are indeed the problem. The poor don't lobby for the laws the rich need to avoid paying taxes - the rich do. Both political parties which run our country are, to greater or lesser extent, worked by our wealthy class like puppets. The disproportionate power they - in ever increasing amounts - continue to wield through the elected officials they bankroll is exactly the problem.

Money has it's own peculiar form of gravity - piles of money attract other piles of money. The descendents of the rich tend to stay rich, and the descendents of the poor tend to stay poor. Having more resources means you have a greater ability to guard those resources then others do, and use them to aquire even more. The rich can take advantage of our economic and political system in many ways that the poor simply cannot, and thereby reinforce the kind of permenant castes we were trying to avoid in this country. That's why many of the founding fathers were concerned about the corrosive effects of dynastic wealth.

That's not to say we don't need any rich or should dissolve all large corporations... but we do need to re-balance the system which has tilted so very far in favor of them already. That lack of balance is why for decades now the average American has steadily become more and more impoverished and the weathiest have been getting wealthier at an increasing pace (which is where the wealth of the poor and middle class has been re-distributed to).

The money which is piling up and stagnating in those piles of dynastic wealth should be circulating through the economy instead. There's a reason why our economy is so fragile now, and recovering so anemically (we need both supply AND demand, not just supply). It would make for a stronger, healthier, more prosperous nation for everyone if we could re-balance things back towards the masses a bit and away from the wealthy.
2013-05-21 11:08:56 AM
3 votes:

pute kisses like a man: you got some double dutch in my irish sandwich... or whatever they call it.

i wonder, would the US make more in tax revenue if it decreased taxes?  there is a point where it's not worth the financial complexity and costs of professional hours to avoid paying taxes.  or, should it just legislate out the possibility of these clever tactics?  not that it would work.  tax people would find a new loophole, or just leave.


In and of itself no, it would not encourage companies to stop using clever accountants and loopholes to avoid taxes for a simple reason: if they're saving less money they're still saving money.

Think about it... Let's say Company X is using tax avoidance schemes to avoid paying $150 million in taxes. Let's say they pay $1 million in costs for the lawyers and accountants on the payroll to handle that for them, so they are profiting $149 million from the scheme. So say we slash the tax rate precipitously so that Company X now only owes $75 million. They're now still making $74 million on the deal. So they keep doing it because there's still $75 million in it for them. They'd be nuts to stop doing it, they have absolutely no reason to change their behavior, just because the rate was lowered. If anything they have the incentive to try to cheat the system even harder, to get back to as close to the $149 million from before as they can get.

It would be nice to just have a set corporate tax rate and no loopholes, no adjustments. But that will never happen because the folks running those companies basically write their own laws through the legislators that we elect and that they pay. They WANT deductions, loopholes and other complexity in the tax code - as much complexity as possible - because they can hide behind that complexity.

Honestly, the best solution is probably to end corporate income tax completely - and just tax the disproportionately wealthy directly instead. We and the rich all did just fine with a 90+% top marginal tax rate in the past... Now the effective tax rate for the wealthiest Americans is actually lower then the average Americans' rate. Drop the corporate rate completely, add a small financial transaction tax to quick stock sales (well, or all of them really) to help keep machine trading to a dull roar, push the top marginal tax rate back up to something like 75%, and an estate tax again for inheritances over (oh let's just pick a number) $600,000. We should probably do something about the capital gains rate as well...

The folks who were rich 100 years ago, are largely the same folks (their descendents that is) who are rich today. Money has power, and kind of it's own gravity. When you have money already you attract more of it more easily, in proportion, and are able to take advantage of our economy in ways that the poor simply cannot. There's nothing wrong with more taxes for those folks who benefit from our economic
system more. In fact, it would be (and currently is) wrong to do anything else.They are not seperate issues. The very reason why the system is as screwed up as it i
2013-05-21 10:38:46 AM
3 votes:
As global capital becomes ever more powerful, giant corporations are holding governments and citizens up for ransom - eliciting subsidies and tax breaks from countries concerned about their nation's "competitiveness" - while sheltering their profits in the lowest-tax jurisdictions they can find. Major advanced countries - and their citizens - need a comprehensive tax agreement that won't allow global corporations to get away with this.

Google, Amazon, Starbucks, every other major corporation, and every big Wall Street bank, are sheltering as much of their U.S. profits abroad as they can, while telling Washington that lower corporate taxes are necessary in order to keep the U.S. "competitive."

Baloney. The fact is, global corporations have no allegiance to any country; their only objective is to make as much money as possible - and play off one country against another to keep their taxes down and subsidies up, thereby shifting more of the tax burden to ordinary people whose wages are already shrinking because companies are playing workers off against each other.

Link
2013-05-21 10:37:08 AM
3 votes:

You're the jerk... jerk: Corporate taxes are silly/ridiculous. What is gained from taxing the corporate entity as opposed to those who own it?


Corporations are people too, my friend.
2013-05-21 10:30:46 AM
3 votes:
The more I parse it, the more I think Pappy091 is trolling everyone. The tone of that post reminds me of the "top-shelf pussy" frat troll.
2013-05-21 10:27:52 AM
3 votes:
Let this be a lesson to you, kids: slave labor and tax evasion will make you very very rich.

/bwahahahaha
2013-05-21 10:25:03 AM
3 votes:

Pappy091: While they generally get a few thousand back every year, I have to make significant quarterly payments to Uncle Sam with no return at tax time.


This information has very little relationship to the actual rate that you pay. Also, if your primary earnings are from wages, then you are not the kind of wealthy that people tend to complain about.
2013-05-21 10:15:14 AM
3 votes:

Pappy091: This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise...


Warren Buffet disagrees
2013-05-21 10:12:41 AM
3 votes:

Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11



Yay!...more income envy.

This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.

Why do people think that raising taxes is going to fix a rising multi-trillion dollar deficit. Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.
2013-05-21 10:07:01 AM
3 votes:
Fix the damn loopholes!

Also, there is significant humor in the fact that Apple is one of the biggest tax payers as well as one of the biggest tax avoiders. That's just fantastic.
2013-05-21 08:49:26 AM
3 votes:
Tim Cook could shiat down the throats of everyone and they will like it because he is Apple
2013-05-21 05:50:17 PM
2 votes:

Pappy091: My local school district just spent over $50 million building a farking football stadium. Every single school except for one already had a perfectly good football stadium. I wish I could say that this was the exception, but money is wasted like this all the time in the name of "education".

 

Those football stadiums are paid for using voter approved bond issuances.   They're not "football stadiums' they're thinly veiled self congratulatory shrines to a community's affluence.    The type crass materialistic wealth for wealth's sake you've been supporting through out the thread.

In short, you are a collossal blowhard, an ignoramus  and there's not left to do but point and laugh at you.
2013-05-21 04:45:40 PM
2 votes:

Pappy091: AngryJailhouseFistfark: CrazyCracka420: It's the politicians who allow these loopholes to exist in the first place that are to blame.

THIS!

You so crazy, cracka.


The Farkers claiming how easy it is to be wealthy and successful remind me of the Tony Robbins sort who sell you books and seminars on how to be successful, and when you get there it's all smoke and mirrors about attitude and positive thinking and hard work and striving and self-sacrifice, but the reality is they refuse to accept that there's an enormous amount of luck involved.

For example, the kid who inherited the house, all paid off. Luck (and he knows it). I'll wager that Pappy and Phinn were not born in the ghetto, raised by their grandmothers while dad was in jail & mom was on and off the crack/smack/booze/etc, trying to function in a run-down urban school overrun with gangs and noise and crime. Effort, sure, but there's a whole lotta right place, right time. It doesn't matter how hard you work if the opportunity isn't there. Likewise, housing prices, and for fark's sake, the commodification of higher education has driven those costs through the roof. Kids saddled with so much debt. Sure, bold, tough Grandfatherly talk:

Live within your means;
Save regularly;

And don't have children. And find that one place where the cost of living is far lower than what they're paying you and pray they don't find out they can pay you less and you'll stay on. Oh, and if you're from a shiatty, depressed area where there used to be jobs until the factory packed up and moved to China, be ready to say goodbye to your (loser) family and never see them again because you damn sure can't afford to take them with you to your new job and efficiency apartment in Bootstrapville. And while you're at it, go ahead an invest in your company's 401k, because that matching pays off. In however many years it takes you to vest. So be prepared to give their matching funds back or pass on that better opportunity that comes along bec ...


Reading comprehension is your friend.

It's not the advantages that some people are born with or even their wealth. Either you're an idiot (doubtful) or you're just being willfully obtuse. Here's the point, so pay attention:

Being born into better conditions than someone else does not mean you get to lecture them on hard work or responsibility. You had help, someone else did not. You are not a better person because you won the genetic lottery while someone else is born into poverty.

Your parental and economic circumstances do not make you a better person nor do they give you the moral right to wag your finger at someone less fortunate than yourself.

So, yeah, get bent.
2013-05-21 01:03:29 PM
2 votes:

Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

i53.tinypic.com
i52.tinypic.comi54.tinypic.comi51.tinypic.com


You were saying? And yes, those charts are a little outdated.  The current ones do not paint any better of a picture
2013-05-21 12:46:00 PM
2 votes:

Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.

That wasn't my post. But it is true that our economy is 70% reliant on consumer spending. While corporate profits are at historic highs, wages are at historic lows. The middle class does not have any money to spend on things beyond necessities. As a result aggregate demand is suffering. So companies aren't hiring. So wages suffer even more. And on and on we go, down the spiral towards the bottom.

I believe it is a false belief that the middle class is suffering. Saying that they only have money to spend on necessities is just laughable in my opinion. Unless we have gotten to a point in our country where 52" flat screens and 2200 sq ft houses are "necessary".


Fact: Average household income  in constant dollars has been stagnant since 1974
Fact: In 1974 the average American household had 1 income earner, not two
Fact: in the same time worker productivity has tripled as have corporate profits
Fact: The housing crisis of 2008 was precipitated in part by a recognition that after the tech bubble burst, and tanked the stock market, the increase invalue of real estate owned was the middle class, only source of accumulating wealth.
Fact: While the average consumer has more material goods than ever before they are also taking on historic levels of debt to pay for them.
Fact: Income inequality is higher tight now that at any other point in US history with a greater percentage of the wealth concentrated in the hands  of the top 10% than at any other time in US History including the Gilded Age
2013-05-21 12:24:25 PM
2 votes:
So, when do we arrest Apple? Or Microsoft? Or Hewlett-Packard?

After all, these corporations are people in so many areas of the law - why aren't they people here, too?

Dusk-You-n-Me: Sure it is. That's what taxes are, a redistribution of wealth. Those who have been successful need to pay back the country that facilitated their wealth. It's We the People, not Me the Person. I don't have kids, but I don't mind paying for public schools because it enhances the public good, and that's good for everybody - poor, middle, and rich.


Well stated. The "fark you, got mine" message pushed so hard by some folks goes against the public good, and such folks see corporate tax shelters as just good business sense. The rich get to pass the costs onto others, while they stay rich. Sure, it's anti-societal, but that's business for you.
2013-05-21 12:21:24 PM
2 votes:

unlikely: So I'm fuzzy on this. Do we hate loopholes that allow corporations to dodge taxes or not?



Well, see that's the tricky part. We hate the loopholes and want the stop corporate exploitation of them right up to the point where we have a vested interest (ie. we makes some monies) from that loophole exploitation. And those are the people who have Congress' ear. But chances are you and I will never be in the position to enjoy that privilege, SO in short, no. We hate and yell and scream but ultimately we are serfs, not all that different than those toiling for barons and dukes and kings in Europe a thousand years ago. We have better shoes. And we have television and cell phones to tell us that we're actually something more than serfs, but the vast majority of us will work full-time, grateful for a handful of Federal Holidays and 2 weeks vacation each year. We'll work and work and work and keep working until we're unable to work anymore (just like our feudal ancestors). Then we'll hope there's enough squirreled away to live out our days indoors with heat and food. And family, we'll hope they'll help. And we have Social Security which will keep us just below poverty and most likely festering in squalor with minimal care until we eventually die. It takes the place of the convent that might have given us a fetid bed and bowl of gruel once upon a time, but the quality's about the same. Dull tedium, aching, and shiatting ourselves. Comfortable, or at least not in agony, as we reminisce about that one time we did something wonderful.

With the exception of some technologies and a some comforts here and there, it's pretty much no different than it was back then. We delude ourselves with our "American Dream" and we watch wealthy people cavort and fark each other and say profoundly stupid things on the television. It makes us feel like we're part of their circle, that we share some of this fancy living, the parties and socializing. We can't really tell the difference because we feel like we're at the party with them in High Def, and imagine what it must be like as we drink our cheap imitations of what they're drinking. We know they sleep at night, and we sleep at night so we figure that's pretty much the same. And we have an uncle who says stupid, outrageous, uninformed things so we tell ourselves, "hey, I've made it!"

What we don't see is while we're waiting for that 2 weeks this summer where we'll spend half of it cleaning out the attic and maybe 5 days at the beach with a day of travel at each end, the 1% is taking weeks at the beach frequently, and it's a private beach in the South of France, or somewhere in Central America with guards to keep the drug cartels and begger children away.  But we don't see that so we go ahead and identify them and it pacifies us. And we'll spend the next 8 months paying off the debt from that vacation. And unable to buy new eyeglasses as a result, but that's OK, 'cause these are still working. The 1% paid cash for their trip and didn't even notice the expense.

And we'll toil at our dumb jobs until we're 65, 68, 70, maybe more, and we might actually enjoy it now and then, just as our feudal serf ancestors might have enjoyed tending a particular garden (that also belonged to someone else), and there you have it. And then we'll grow decrepit and die, and the billionaires who've socked away their wealth and connived with their accountants and lobbyists to protect and keep their wealth will not notice our passing, except to tell some flunky to find another, younger serf to take our former place at the mill-wheel.
2013-05-21 12:08:08 PM
2 votes:

Pappy091: I believe it is a false belief that the middle class is suffering.


It isn't false. It's a fact that wages are at historic lows. It's a fact that half the jobs in America pay less than $34,000 a year. It's a fact that without government assistance, 30% of our population would live in poverty. It's a fact that one in five children in the U.S. lives in poverty. You can ignore it, as most of our politicians and media does, or you can accept it and decide whether this is how you think the richest most powerful nation in the world should operate.
2013-05-21 11:09:20 AM
2 votes:

Pappy091: theorellior: Pappy091: Wrong on almost all counts. I am not rich, not even close. I would love to be in the 5%. Hopefully I will be by the time I retire.

Oh, so you're just one of the temporarily disadvantaged rich people. You'll qualify for that big tax break one day, gol durn it!

Hopefully, and then you will be free to hate me. I will be too rich to care, lol.


I know I shouldn't feed the fire here, but Pappy091's comments remind me of that episode of Futurama where Fry is advocating all these concessions for the rich, but actually isn't rich. Then he says "I might be someday, then people like me better watch out!"
2013-05-21 10:18:14 AM
2 votes:

Pappy091: Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


Yay!...more income envy.

This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise and gross) than you could even imagine.

Why do people think that raising taxes is going to fix a rising multi-trillion dollar deficit. Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.


Oh look everyone! Pappy is here tell us how bad the rich have it. Oh please, Pappy... do it some more! Stand up for those poor, oppressed, sad, rich folks who so desperately need you to defend them. They're counting on you!
2013-05-21 10:15:35 AM
2 votes:

Pappy091: Raising taxes is a drop in the bucket compared to what we need to do to get out of this hole.


So you agree it will help. Soak 'em
2013-05-21 09:44:47 AM
2 votes:
So I'm fuzzy on this. Do we hate loopholes that allow corporations to dodge taxes or not?

Exxon and Halliburton might not like it if the answer is "yes we hate them, close those loopholes."
2013-05-22 05:05:29 AM
1 votes:
Steve Jobs would never put license plates on his cars.  He'd rather trade them in within the first two months for a new one rather than pay a cent in taxes for the plates.

That says something.
2013-05-22 12:48:21 AM
1 votes:

Phinn: Stop wasting your time and everyone else's by pretending that you are an ethical person.


Stop wasting everyone's time and go live by yourself in the wilderness. You're clearly not cut out for this civilization thing.
2013-05-21 10:27:11 PM
1 votes:

dchurch0: So, long story short, I'm lucky. I apologize if I came across as a snob. I guess I just feel like if I can make it based on where my life started, anyone can with a little bit of planning and focus.


I apologize as well for assuming the worst. It's an unfortunate knee-jerk when I see the likes of "earn more than you spend" and "stop going out to eat" that gets bandied about.
The disconnect just seems to be kind of disconcerting even if Mr. Mustache isn't selling get rich quick schemes.

Dave Ramsey is always on when I go to dinner, so I end up listening rather than having to punch the radio because Taylor Swift seems to be on every other station. The Christian thing is bothersome, but I seem to hear a lot of situations like "I own my own home and two rental properties. I am $120,000K in student loan debt and don't think I can afford my payments. Should I sell one of my rentals to pay for it?" followed by "Stop going to Starbucks every time you go outside and live debt free!"
It's like they have no idea...
It's like when Mitt Romney said he hit hard times when he had to sell stock to afford college.
And then they tell people to work hard, move to where the jobs are, start your own business, retire like a king, etc, like the only thing stopping them is restaurant bills and an underutilized stock portfolio. The problem isn't even understood.

Bah, sorry. Twitchy after reading through a thread full of bootstrappers.
2013-05-21 09:07:40 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Most of your points revolve around the common misconception that there is a finite amount of wealth in the country that is being hoarded to a greater and greater extent by the wealthy. These people aren't burying gold in their back yards. They are invested in the economy. Their wealth is measure by and large by their assets, not cash.


The economy has enough investment capital to employ everyone, in fact there is too much of it because the richest 0.01% have accumulated far too much income/assets. This is why all the asset bubbles keep growing so large and it just keeps coming - because there is nowhere productive for that excess investment capital to go, so it just ends up overpricing some class of asset for a while, and then once the bubble is too large it bursts and the money flows elsewhere. There is no such thing as a supply based economy - it is demand based. People don't create businesses to make stuff unless someone wants to buy it. People don't buy stuff if they don't have the money/income to do so. When money goes to the rich a large portion of it gets split off into the investment side of the economy, when if it went to the poor or middle class it would mostly go into creating demand for goods and services. Setting up the economy so the rich get a disproportionate amount of it means that economic growth is more and more fragile, and more and more anemic as time goes on.

By the way, it sounds like you own a company with a moderate handful of people at most, so unless your company is in a ridiculously profitable industry, that puts you somewhere in the middle class at most, so you are likely about half as well off as you would be if the economy was more equitable. The reason most people can't really get a handle on how screwed up the US economy is, is because they just have no clue how far it has been skewed in favor of the ultra rich - there was a good video with some graphs to try and give people a handle on it linked a while back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM
2013-05-21 09:06:05 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: What is the source of money to repay these bonds? Taxes.

The people who wanted the stadium are forcing everyone else to pay for it.

The fiction of voting doesn't change the fact that people are paying for that stadium at the point of a gun.


No one is forcing you to by the point of the gun to live in a community where $50 million for a high school football stadium seems like a good use of local resources.   You can live anywhere else in the country as an American citizen if you don't like it.   There's no shortage of areas in the country where it would seem pants on the head retarded to spend $50 million on a high school stadium, and it's called "Anywhere but Texas."     Keeping all government local has consequences when everyone around you is a retard.
2013-05-21 08:53:17 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: What is the source of money to repay these bonds? Taxes.

The people who wanted the stadium are forcing everyone else to pay for it.

The fiction of voting doesn't change the fact that people are paying for that stadium at the point of a gun.

The people who support banning guns always seem to be the same people who get a hard-on for using guns to force others to pay for their preferred crap. They don't hate guns, as long as they're the State's guns.


Sorry, can't blame "The Gubment" for this one.   This wasn't Washigton, it wasn't even Austin, it was as local as local gets.   I thought that's what "small govenrment" was all about?   There's no "fiction" here, only fact.    The local community decided they wanted to pool their money together to pay for a $50 million for a football stadium.

Got to hand it to Texans.  They hate to  pay money to educate or heal brown skin people, but they never pass up an opportunity to spend money blowing them up, imprisoning them or watching them run around with a ball for their entertainment.
2013-05-21 07:03:42 PM
1 votes:

Big_Fat_Liar: What makes you think America isn't giving?


Tens of thousands of people out on the streets with no place to sleep. That comes to mind as one thing that could cause someone to think that. Then there's the hundreds of thousands living in slums.
2013-05-21 05:27:17 PM
1 votes:

AngryJailhouseFistfark: believe you have described perfectly the world in which we are currently living. In fact, this is the world that has existed for the past 8,000 years. That other scenario you described exists only in text books.


I wonder how different things would be if we had a more expansive view of history.
2013-05-21 05:26:41 PM
1 votes:

Shazam999: I don't have any sympathy for you. You had some luck that were wiped out by some bad life choices.


and thanks for being part of the problem.
2013-05-21 05:21:45 PM
1 votes:

Hyjamon: pxlboy: Pappy091: pxlboy: Pappy091: AngryJailhouseFistfark: CrazyCracka420:

"Why don't they just get a job"
"Why don't they just go to school?"
"Maybe they shouldn't have had kids so young"
And so on. Privilege takes itself for granted and too seriously. It forgets that not everyone starts at the same place. It forgets where it comes from and has the audacity to chastise others for not having it.
So yeah, to just blurt out, "Work hard and I'm sure something will happen" is empty and worthless.

what is a better idea or solution?

Let me attempt to clarify what I think the arguments are being made (if there are any at all) here.  Some people are born into situations that provide more support and thus allow offspring in that environment a better chance to succeed compared to other offspring born into less nurturing environments.

someone from the less nurturing environment seeks advice on how to better their lot in life.  Apparently, someone from the better support environment cannot just say "work hard and hope for a break" because it is merely a platitude.  What would be something more worthwhile to say or suggest?


De-rigging the game a little.

Put education back within reach.

without that foundation what you have its just not as obtainable as it used to be
2013-05-21 05:16:46 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: Rent-seeking is using something other than these market processes to make a profit. It refers to actions when there is something other than the win-win transaction in a voluntary trade, such as obtaining the use of governmental force to exclude competitors, fix prices, mandate production methods, or some other creative way to violate people's human rights. When that happens, the crony and the government wins, and everyone else loses.


I believe you have described perfectly the world in which we are currently living. In fact, this is the world that has existed for the past 8,000 years. That other scenario you described exists only in text books.
2013-05-21 05:12:05 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Guess what? Some people will have advantages that you don't have. Life isn't fair, get over it.


But you were just saying how easy it was to retire as a multi-millionaire. Or did you leave off the asterisk with the terms and conditions?

My story, It's not so unusual, I'm sure you've heard it all before. I'm 48. I've worked full or part time since I was 13. I went to state universities in the 80's and early 90's before the tuition got out of control so no loans. I always had jobs at school that either paid me money, or housing, or food. I took time off of school to work. I had help from my family. I changed careers after graduate school because the path I'd chosen just wasn't going to pay enough to have a home and family. I was fortunate to have been living in a community with an excellent Junior College program where I could get the training and a large enough sector of the IT economy that I could get a paid internship right away. And again, right time, at the start of the IT boom in the late 90's. One cannot make that happen.

I was lucky to buy a house in a stable community right before the boom. I divorced after 14 years of marriage. Ex wife is a goddamn shrew. I spent a huge pile of money, including much of my retirement savings, in custody litigation. Bummer. Kids are a liability. It would have been cheaper just to never see them and pay more child support, I guess, so I didn't make such a good choice there. I've bought a second house, but following the recent banking fiasco it was overpriced. This market's strong though, and it will continue to appreciate so long as I'm there, but it'll be a while before the actual value catches up to what I paid for it. And I'll never pay it off and actually live in it. Not at my age.

Bank owns it, really, I'm just renting it from them. I make good money. Latest numbers out say I make more than the median income for my state, so I got that going for me, which is nice. My wife's second wife is disabled. Again, a liability. I should have dumped her when I had the chance. I guess I'm a romantic. Rich in love, right? Huh? Am I right? Yeah.

I don't begrudge the successful. I admire the hard-work and determination, especially if it can be done without shiatting all over friends and neglecting family. Or if one has the discipline and self awareness to say, "I want to be a Captain of Industry and will remain a childless bachelor until I am." Good on ye. It's the X-treme wealth. The more-money-than-God crowd who take their wealth and don't trickle it down through investments, at least not here in the US. Their wealth is trickling down all over Asia. Fat lot of good that does anyone here. They talk a great game about globalization, about freeing up capital and creating jobs, but unless you have the mobility to go where they're doing business, and can pick up everything to go (or leave it all behind to go), you're farked and left greeting customers at the Wal-Mart.
2013-05-21 04:55:26 PM
1 votes:

BumpInTheNight: Geotpf: Reverend Monkeypants: Like it or not, nothing actually illegal happened.

Your legislators at work

Exactly.  Blame Congress, not Apple.  It's Apple's job (and every individual) to pay as little taxes as possible without breaking any laws.  Congress writes the laws; if they have a problem with them, they can change them.

Wasn't it only recently that some state managed to making having sex with corpses illegal?  Doing up to the line of what is considered illegal is a morally bankrupt stance to take.  But you're right, corporations are people too, just psychopaths that's all.


Psychopathic and sociopathic behavior are prevalent in business. It's the "world needs assholes to get sh*t done" mentality that helps keep business going. But they need to kept in check, and they're not.

There were some economic counterbalances in place that still allowed the wealthy to be wealthy, but not at the expense of the rest of us.

And they are enabled by their pets in Congress who gave sold us down the river for a relative pittance and we get to foot the bill.
2013-05-21 04:43:46 PM
1 votes:

Reverend Monkeypants: Like it or not, nothing actually illegal happened.

Your legislators at work


Exactly.  Blame Congress, not Apple.  It's Apple's job (and every individual) to pay as little taxes as possible without breaking any laws.  Congress writes the laws; if they have a problem with them, they can change them.
2013-05-21 04:40:20 PM
1 votes:
Like it or not, nothing actually illegal happened.

Your legislators at work
2013-05-21 04:34:22 PM
1 votes:

AngryJailhouseFistfark: CrazyCracka420: It's the politicians who allow these loopholes to exist in the first place that are to blame.

THIS!

You so crazy, cracka.


The Farkers claiming how easy it is to be wealthy and successful remind me of the Tony Robbins sort who sell you books and seminars on how to be successful, and when you get there it's all smoke and mirrors about attitude and positive thinking and hard work and striving and self-sacrifice, but the reality is they refuse to accept that there's an enormous amount of luck involved.

For example, the kid who inherited the house, all paid off. Luck (and he knows it). I'll wager that Pappy and Phinn were not born in the ghetto, raised by their grandmothers while dad was in jail & mom was on and off the crack/smack/booze/etc, trying to function in a run-down urban school overrun with gangs and noise and crime. Effort, sure, but there's a whole lotta right place, right time. It doesn't matter how hard you work if the opportunity isn't there. Likewise, housing prices, and for fark's sake, the commodification of higher education has driven those costs through the roof. Kids saddled with so much debt. Sure, bold, tough Grandfatherly talk:

Live within your means;
Save regularly;

And don't have children. And find that one place where the cost of living is far lower than what they're paying you and pray they don't find out they can pay you less and you'll stay on. Oh, and if you're from a shiatty, depressed area where there used to be jobs until the factory packed up and moved to China, be ready to say goodbye to your (loser) family and never see them again because you damn sure can't afford to take them with you to your new job and efficiency apartment in Bootstrapville. And while you're at it, go ahead an invest in your company's 401k, because that matching pays off. In however many years it takes you to vest. So be prepared to give their matching funds back or pass on that better opportunity that comes along because you don't want to l ...


Preach it.
2013-05-21 04:19:55 PM
1 votes:

caddisfly: I own a small business.  I pay federal, state, county and city taxes on my income, the company's income, and the company's property.  I take home about 60% of the income I produce; the rest goes to various taxes. I have been audited twice in the past eight years (with no wrongdoing ever found).  Yet the biggest companies in the nation pay nothing upon billions of dollars in income.

The best government money can buy indeed.


Also this.
2013-05-21 04:19:43 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Almet: Pappy091: This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise...

Warren Buffet disagrees

Well, I am in generally in a higher tax bracket and I can promise you that I pay much higher taxes than my employees do. While they generally get a few thousand back every year, I have to make significant quarterly payments to Uncle Sam with no return at tax time.


You think you qualify as rich, that's cute.
2013-05-21 04:04:57 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: I use that stadium as one small example of a much larger problem. It goes well beyond sports. Education spending is out of control and to make matter worse it's not being spent on things that actual benefit kids. We are falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world each year.


The reason this happens is because school districts are government operations.  They get their revenue by force.  They have no customers.

Because schools have no customers, every capital-expenditure decision (and every managerial decision, frankly) becomes a complete guess.  A shot in the dark -- a decision that has ZERO effect on the ability of the school to get paid.

By disconnecting expenditure decisions and revenue (i.e., funding via forced taxation instead of voluntary purchase of educational services), the school has no economic information on which to base its executive decisions.  They couldn't make the right decisions even if they wanted to.  If Starbucks spent billions of dollars on things that customers didn't actually want, it would lose that money, which could have been spent on profitable, desired things.   It gets immediate economic feedback on every spending decision it makes.  That information guides its decisions.

Schools do not get economic feedback on their expenditures, which would help them determine when their spending decisions were actually increasing consumer satisfaction.  The consumers continue to pay if they want to or not because they are forced to pay.

Tax-supported schools operate in an informational vacuum.  In that vacuum of economic information, something else creeps in to guide a school's spending decisions -- political information.  All they have is political information, which usually comes in the form of squawking and shrieking at board meetings, and other attempts to cause political embarrassment.

That's why schools tend to decline in quality, and increase in cost, until they reach a point of political embarrassment.
2013-05-21 03:47:23 PM
1 votes:

DeathCipris: Or how bout close the loopholes that lets Apple and all the other mega-corporations sit on the mountain of gold they have? Why pass on yet another tax to the working class?

/Apple sucks


You're better off actually setting a tax rate that corprations will pay.  At 35% corporate tax and the most mobile society in history, is it any surprise that companies move overseas?  Sure, we'll never get to cayman levels of banking tax but there's probably a lot of companies that would come back if they only paid in the area of 5-10%.  The 10% that you get is better than the 35% that you dont.
2013-05-21 03:26:04 PM
1 votes:

Magorn: YixilTesiphon: Magorn: You know what would happen if the youth of today WERE taught sound financial management, moral rectitude and generally to have a lesser appetite for the consumption of commerical goods?  The Economy fails.  It drops right the fark off a cliff and doesn;t come back.

DERP

call it derp if you like.  but then go read any article on modern economics or the US economy written in the last 20 years and you'll see I am 100% correct.  We are a consumption based economy and any lessening in consumer spending is considered a negative for the economy


All economies are consumption-based economies.  The whole point of production is consumption.  They are both seamless parts of the same economic system.  Every part of a system is connected to every other part.  You can't look at one part in isolation and hope to say anything meaningful about the system.  Only systemic thinking can explain it.  Everyone is, at times, a consumer and a producer.  Saying one is more important than the other is not just wrong, it's gibberish.

Consumption and production contract (i.e., an economy declines) when consumer preferences become discoordinated from the existing production supply and its capital structure.  Producers are making the wrong things, in the wrong quantities, in the wrong ways.

The over-building of single-family houses is a prime example.  That disaster occurred for the same reasons that economic decline in general occurs, in slightly different ways and on different scales every day -- artificial, government-sponsored manipulation of the money supply.

Money is half of every transaction in America (except for a tiny amount of barter).  When you distort money, and fark with it, you fark with everything.  Government decreed that money for single-family houses would be artificially easy to get.  They did this to buy votes.  But it made house-buying loan-money under-priced, which is another way of saying that it made single-family houses over-priced.  This was experienced by the ordinary consumer as outrageous inflation in the single-housing market.

College prices are doing the same thing, for the same reasons.  But this dis-coordination between production and consumption occurs daily, in a less-differentiated way, with all money and all goods, all the time, because of the Federal Reserve.  All because of the manipulation of money and its concomitant manipulation of prices.
2013-05-21 03:19:26 PM
1 votes:

Magorn: Pappy091: Netrngr: Magorn: Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.

It's a major failing of our country that our youth has no understanding of sound financial management.


I am a little late to the thread, but finally read it all and have a question for Pappy091 and Phinn and everyone else calling for better education and teaching kids more about finances:

how is the "better education" going to be paid for and who is going to pay for the "better education" to be provided?  How would education be reformed to provide this?

and for Source4leko, I think you are asking how to be a "haves" immediately, to which there is no easy solution.  Phinn is close with the start the business idea, it goes along with the saying "you will never be rich working for someone else" but it also runs contradictory to the idea that everyone can own a business which leads to no workers.

The advice they are giving about becoming a multimillionaire in 3-4 decades is vaild, but it basically means live poor for 3-4 decades.  And i think they are doing the math on some very healthy (and possibly unrealistic) rates of growth 10-15%.  It is a hard balance of having fun in life while you are able to or saving in the hopes you can live long enough to enjoy the money you saved.

I am 34, have 88k in my 401k, and contribute 16% of my 70k salary a year into it and I am projected to barely crack 1 million in 30 years at 5%.  (2 million if I can get a steady 8%.)

accounting for inflation (2.5% ) 1 million would be equivalent to 533k in today's money. so I will still not be a millionaire in the same sense of buying power when I retire at 65.

http://www.mycalculators.com/ca/savecalcm.html
2013-05-21 02:44:40 PM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: you have pee hands: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

They're not the problem to the extent that they're just a byproduct of a system of taxation that's regressive beyond the point of upper middle / lower upper class, but they sure lobby like hell to keep things that way.

BS.

I guarantee you a gigantic chunk of liberal progressive hippie Obama voters own Apple products.

I have been saying it all along, why no outrage over "Big Apple" like people demonize oil companies? We all depend on oil, their profit margins are low. Apple makes useless crap with large profit margins nobody really needs, and is sitting on more money than any other corporation on Earth.

I think we should come up with a federal smart phone tax, and make it big, say, 15% of the purchase price, at minimum. If you are going to tax the bajesus out of the stuff that gets us to work, and ships our goods, you can tax toys for the dumb masses.


As a progressive/liberal (Obama's not a liberal btw, he's actually right of center), who voted for Obama (all politicians are corporate whores, it's just which corporate whore do you think is less slimy than the next guy), I'm "upset" about this.  I'm not mad or angry at Apple or any other corporations (such as oil companies).  They are businesses, and businesses are there to make as much money as possible.  It's the politicians who allow these loopholes to exist in the first place that are to blame.

Did I just blow your mind?  Of course not, you'll still go back to your "liberals are all like this" world view.  Because you're a farking moron.
2013-05-21 02:40:54 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Source4leko: Pappy091: Source4leko: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

[i53.tinypic.com image 590x443]
[i52.tinypic.com image 590x442][i54.tinypic.com image 590x442][i51.tinypic.com image 590x443]

You were saying? And yes, those charts are a little outdated.  The current ones do not paint any better of a picture

And why does any of that mean that we should hate rich people?

I because they control it all.  We get the leftovers

That is absolutely ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding of economics. No one can "control it all". They aren't burying gold bars in the backyard.

I think it's just easier for a lot of people to complain about the haves vs. the have not rather than work to become one of the haves, which is shockingly easy to do. Not talking about you specifically, just people in general that share your view point.


Care to elaborate on this?  How it is "Shockingly easy" to become one of the haves?  I am legitimately curious how this is so easy.

Live within your means and start saving/investing at an early age. Don't buy a house you can't afford with no to little down payment. Don't run up your CCs every month. etc, etc.

If your average person started investing in a Roth IRA or some other retirement investment in their early 20's they would retire a multi-millionaire. It's so easy that it is insane that more people don't do it. I know I sound like a broken record, but the reason it isn't done is because our youth isn't taught to do it.

Inherited a house no mortage, and I save 10% of my income, with 3% of my pre tax pay in an IRA with employer matching.  Car will be paid off at the end of the summer, student loans equal one days pay a month.  I made the average wage (approx 40k).  I have CC debt that I am paying down from when I was injured and ...


I simplified it as much as I can.
I don't know, or want to know, enough about you to become your life coach. From what you said it sounds like you are doing much better than most people your age. There are a lot of people that would consider you one of the "haves". Keep doing what you are doing.
Are you asking how to become super rich by your mid twenties?  Invent Facebook or something.


I know the difference between hitting a triple and being born on third base.  I have friends ask me for advice because 'I know what I'm doing' and my answer to them is that if they are asking me, they are in trouble.  I see nothing but stagnant wages around me, outside of the financial fields, and not much hope for the middle class down the road as more jobs are outsourced.  Right now I work in a SETM field, (High precision manufacturing, on the floor which is why I am responding slowly).  I don't want to be super rich ever, I want to someday be able to provide for a family, and possibly even retire.  I just want to know what I should do to be able to expect to do that?  Go back and get a finance degree?  Mechanical engineering?  Serious question.  Or is starting a business really my only plan?
2013-05-21 02:09:06 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Netrngr: Magorn: Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.


Fact: While the average consumer has more material goods than ever before they are also taking on historic levels of debt to pay for them.

Well maybe if these people would learn how to manage their money and not go into debt for them they wouldn't be in nearly the condition they are now. You never go into debt for playthings. That's the problem in a nutshell. too many peoples parents didn't teach them the meaning of the words No, Need,and Want.
The level of entitlement im seeing in the early to mid twenty somethings is astounding. Since when did being here actually guarantee you anything.  Case and point... The brides sister calls he constantly wanting money for rent power etc yet always has money to party but she ends up paying her bills.. that is until the last time she called crying and i demanded the wife not send a red cent. Amazingly she went to work the next day.
I would say it was just her but I'm seeing it all over. WTF happened?

It's a major failing of our country that our youth has no understanding of sound financial management.

One of the biggest reasons that the children of people that are well off are way more likely to be well off themselves is because they are much more likely to be taught how to manage money in a smart, forward thinking way. The farther down the income scale you go the less knowledge there is of basic finance, much less things like retirement investing, etc.


You know what would happen if the youth of today WERE taught sound financial management, moral rectitude and generally to have a lesser appetite for the consumption of commerical goods?  The Economy fails.  It drops right the fark off a cliff and doesn;t come back.  Seriously,  the American economy is now entirely dependent on consumer spending.   During the worst part of the Great recession in 2009 it was reported that people were saving more, paying off existing debts and showing a general reluctance to take on new ones.   Wall Street's reaction was just short of panic.  Economists the country over from both sides of the political aisle opined about how disatrous a state of affairs this was and called on the government to do something, anything to fix it.

That's the brutal bottom line right now.  Our whole economy is utterly depndant on middle class consumers making wrong choices for themselves that hurt them financially.  If tey stop, the whole house of cards comes crashing down/
2013-05-21 01:54:33 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: Source4leko: Dusk-You-n-Me: Source4leko: How it is "Shockingly easy" to become one of the haves?

You have to deserve it. See, poor people are poor because they deserve it. Rich people are rich because they deserve it. If you aren't rich, it's because you didn't deserve. If you did, you'd be rich. QED

No, I really want someone to explain this so me.  I am tired of just getting farked, and I know things are never going to change, so I figure why not become the person doing the farking.  I want to know how I do that, no shiat.

1. Earn more than you spend.

2. Invest the difference in cash-generating ways, either through conventional financial instruments (IRAs, funds, etc.), or use it to start or expand a profitable enterprise. Which will help you earn more ...

3. Repeat.

How do you identify a profitable business to start and grow? Learn to give the people what they want. Start by asking yourself that question 90 times a day -- what can I do to deliver something to people that they want?

Give, give, give. Focus on yourself and your production of desired goods and services. Focus on other people's unmet (or undermet) wants.

Learning how to get paid in the process is always much easier than figuring out what people really want but don't have.

Once you've done this a few times, and built profitable businesses that please lots and lots of satisfied customers, you'll soon encounter all the myriad ways that government will get in your way, take from you, and favor its cronies.

Have fun!


Oh look, another answer that could be on CNN.com of 'how to save for retirement'.  There was a ton of new information there.  I think you forgot 'buy low, sell high!'   Also, thanks for the chip about how the government will take from me, that makes me realize you aren't an ideologue at all, and that your information is not ideologically motivated in any way.
2013-05-21 01:48:09 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Source4leko: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

[i53.tinypic.com image 590x443]
[i52.tinypic.com image 590x442][i54.tinypic.com image 590x442][i51.tinypic.com image 590x443]

You were saying? And yes, those charts are a little outdated.  The current ones do not paint any better of a picture

And why does any of that mean that we should hate rich people?

I because they control it all.  We get the leftovers

That is absolutely ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding of economics. No one can "control it all". They aren't burying gold bars in the backyard.

I think it's just easier for a lot of people to complain about the haves vs. the have not rather than work to become one of the haves, which is shockingly easy to do. Not talking about you specifically, just people in general that share your view point.


Care to elaborate on this?  How it is "Shockingly easy" to become one of the haves?  I am legitimately curious how this is so easy.

Live within your means and start saving/investing at an early age. Don't buy a house you can't afford with no to little down payment. Don't run up your CCs every month. etc, etc.

If your average person started investing in a Roth IRA or some other retirement investment in their early 20's they would retire a multi-millionaire. It's so easy that it is insane that more people don't do it. I know I sound like a broken record, but the reason it isn't done is because our youth isn't taught to do it.


Inherited a house no mortage, and I save 10% of my income, with 3% of my pre tax pay in an IRA with employer matching.  Car will be paid off at the end of the summer, student loans equal one days pay a month.  I made the average wage (approx 40k).  I have CC debt that I am paying down from when I was injured and had to take unpaid time off work.  I eat out maybe one day a week, and the other 6 nights a week myself and other mid 20's friends all cook a large dinner for all of us to save money.  I am asking you what I can change to actually become a 'have'.  Not "save for retirement" bullshiat that you think middle income earners and below don't understand, they just cant afford it.  So what should I change to become a 'have'?  Go to busisness school?  Because my 40k is just enough for me to work my way out of minor CC debt, keep current with small car and student loan payments, and put away enough for my property tax (10% of my income, pre tax.)  God help me if I had a kid.  Or if I get hurt again.  And it hurts my brain to think about if I wasn't fortunate enough to inherit someplace to live, how long it would take
2013-05-21 01:46:39 PM
1 votes:
Here are a few salient points:
1) Apple pays taxes on all profits is makes in each country in which it makes those profits.  German profits are paid to Germany; Japan profits are paid to Japan; US profits are paid to the US; etc.
2) Apple is simply transferring its ALREADY TAXED foreign profits to Ireland for centralized management. Apple pays taxes to Ireland, at an arguably low tax rate, when it makes these transfers. This violates no laws anywhere and is not immoral.
3) Apple is only required to pay US income tax on these foreign profits if it chooses to transfer these funds back to the US.  Under US law, Apple is not required to transfer its foreign profits back to the US.
4) Lastly, let's remember that Apple pays US taxes, at a 35% tax rate, on all interest earned through investments of it's foreign capital.
Maybe the US government should reduce the tax rate for the return foreign profits to the US.  Remember, these profits have already been appropriately taxed by foreign governments.
2013-05-21 01:45:30 PM
1 votes:
If Apple is following the law, they're just doing what Congress incentivized them to do. Personally I don't look to maximize my tax liability every April.
2013-05-21 01:43:37 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Source4leko: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: ltdanman44: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

[i53.tinypic.com image 590x443]
[i52.tinypic.com image 590x442][i54.tinypic.com image 590x442][i51.tinypic.com image 590x443]

You were saying? And yes, those charts are a little outdated.  The current ones do not paint any better of a picture

And why does any of that mean that we should hate rich people?

I because they control it all.  We get the leftovers

That is absolutely ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding of economics. No one can "control it all". They aren't burying gold bars in the backyard.

I think it's just easier for a lot of people to complain about the haves vs. the have not rather than work to become one of the haves, which is shockingly easy to do. Not talking about you specifically, just people in general that share your view point.


Care to elaborate on this?  How it is "Shockingly easy" to become one of the haves?  I am legitimately curious how this is so easy.

Live within your means and start saving/investing at an early age. Don't buy a house you can't afford with no to little down payment. Don't run up your CCs every month. etc, etc.

If your average person started investing in a Roth IRA or some other retirement investment in their early 20's they would retire a multi-millionaire. It's so easy that it is insane that more people don't do it. I know I sound like a broken record, but the reason it isn't done is because our youth isn't taught to do it.


A lot of young people barely make enough to cover their bills. Expecting them to put aside enough money to make that IRA worthwhile is pretty ridiculous.
2013-05-21 01:33:40 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: Dusk-You-n-Me: Oh boy. I don't think we need to converse anymore. Good luck out there on your own.

No one is on his own.  I'm certainly not.

The difference between you and me is that I cooperate with everyone I interact with.  I give more than I take.  I never rob, steal, or threaten them.  I never do so directly, and I never rely on an agent or proxy to do those things for me.

It takes hundreds of people working in dozens of different places just to make a pencil.  When I buy that pencil, I am cooperating with a complex web of people, none of whom knows everyone else, but we all cooperate, for our mutual benefit, to make and have useful things.

You, on the other hand, take and take and take and take, and you resent the people who organize people into productive enterprises.  You cheerlead from the sidelines as the Men With Guns go around telling everyone what they can make, what they have to charge for it, and how much everyone is supposed to pay for their "services."  This is from you, I'm sure, who has built nothing, created nothing, employed no one, and helped no one.

How many successful, self-sustaining enterprises have you created that employed anyone?  More than 5 people?  Ten?

I wouldn't trust a shiat-stain taker like you to run a Starbucks for one shift.  But you presume to know that the people who help create EVERYTHING you use in your life, from the coffee you drink to the shoes on your feet, must certainly OWE MORE than what they've already paid.  As if you know.  As if you've taken the time to carefully calculate it all.

The creators and producers of all of the desired things in this world owe you fark-all.


This is the epitome of what is wrong with this country, it's literally fark you i got mine.
2013-05-21 01:32:27 PM
1 votes:

Magnus: Magorn: Average household income in constant dollars has been stagnant since 1974

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/

Average household income 1974 in 2011 US dollars:  $71,163
Average household income 2011 in 2011 US dollars:  $121,084
source:  Census Bureau.


This is one of the worst misreadings of data I have ever seen. You got those numbers from Table H-17 from your Census Bureau link, but they are not dollar values. Those are the numbers (in thousands) of households in 1974 and 2011, not the median household income for those years.

Did it seriously not tip you off that you were doing something wrong when you pegged the median household income for 2011 at $121,084? Did that number actually sound reasonable to you?
2013-05-21 01:24:14 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: chocolate covered poop: Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: mongbiohazard: That's not to say we don't need any rich or should dissolve all large corporations... but we do need to re-balance the system which has tilted so very far in favor of them already. That lack of balance is why for decades now the average American has steadily become more and more impoverished and the weathiest have been getting wealthier at an increasing pace (which is where the wealth of the poor and middle class has been re-distributed to).

The money which is piling up and stagnating in those piles of dynastic wealth should be circulating through the economy instead. There's a reason why our economy is so fragile now, and recovering so anemically (we need both supply AND demand, not just supply). It would make for a stronger, healthier, more prosperous nation for everyone if we could re-balance things back towards the masses a bit and away from the wealthy.

Looking at the big picture, it's fairly obvious what has happened over the last 30 years. It has to do with a battle between the forces trying to raise wages, and the forces trying to raise assets. The asset side, of course, has won this battle in both parties.

Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.

Wait, what?  The assumption that wealth is finite is invalid?  Explain.
Also it's not so much that the rich person that has $100 that someone else could, it's that the extra $100 in the hands of someone who already has $2,000,000 in their bank account is less likely to spend that incremental $100 than the family who is living paycheck to paycheck on $30,000 /yr...so its win-win: improving quality of life of the less fortunate and also getting money flowing through the economy.


That $100 isn't sitting in their bank account. It's invested in some form or fashion in the economy. That $100 isn't taken out of the pool.

This is the exact reason that our schools should teach more economic/financial classes.


So there's some physical or economic law that says the $100 HAS to be invested?  That the earned interest isn't just a self fulfilling snowball effect of inflation?  Or that any real value generated from that interest isn't just swapped back and forth between those who are already exorbitantly wealthy (just bankers swapping money and none of it ever actually returns to the bottom of the pyramid).  And these investments might help nominal GDP but I sincerely doubt they have anywhere near the impact on unemployment as most people like to believe.  and I think that comes to the core of the issue, why do we want the economy to be "good"?  is it so that the median human quality of life improves, or just so the aggregate pile of human "wealth" grows?

and part of the education problem is that economics and finance are pseudo-sciences that are cast off at times as actual science - there are no underlying physical phenomena that unify economic observations, yet we treat most economic notions with a level of sacredness one might grant to the laws of thermodynamics.  or at the very least economic systems are so complex and linked to human decisions that trying to come up with any theoretical background is presently impossible. so it's become highly empirical in nature, and as human history proceeds we are collecting more and more data points that could suggest some of our old assumptions might have been flawed, or outright bad ideas.
2013-05-21 01:15:59 PM
1 votes:

Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


Yet another reason for the fair tax.

The tax code should have no more than eight words, not eighty million.
2013-05-21 12:58:20 PM
1 votes:
Not percentage wise.  And this isn't about rich people, it is about the biggest corporations in America that pay little to no tax yet they make billions of dollars.

Hey, next time try including some facts in your bullshiat.  In 2012, Apple paid $6 billion in taxes to the US Treasury.  That's about $16.5 million per day, and about 1 dollar out of every 40 paid in US corporate taxes for 2012.  For 2013 they expect to pay $7 billion in the US.

That doesn't count the taxes they pay in other countries on the revenue they get from selling products there, because -- and this may shock you -- American companies that sell stuff in, say, Japan have to pay income tax in Japan.

Yes, there are problems with the US tax system that favor corporations.  Yes, it would be a great idea to simplify corporate tax laws and close a shiat-ton of loopholes.  Get some actual numbers before claiming that one of the largest tax-payers in the country is getting a free ride though.

Challenge:  name three private individuals who pay more in US taxes than Apple.
2013-05-21 12:56:19 PM
1 votes:
Don't hate the player, hate the game.

It's completely asinine that the Senate is yelling at Apple for following the law.  If Congress thinks Apple isn't paying enough taxes, they should change the law so they pay more.
2013-05-21 12:52:58 PM
1 votes:

chocolate covered poop: Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: mongbiohazard: That's not to say we don't need any rich or should dissolve all large corporations... but we do need to re-balance the system which has tilted so very far in favor of them already. That lack of balance is why for decades now the average American has steadily become more and more impoverished and the weathiest have been getting wealthier at an increasing pace (which is where the wealth of the poor and middle class has been re-distributed to).

The money which is piling up and stagnating in those piles of dynastic wealth should be circulating through the economy instead. There's a reason why our economy is so fragile now, and recovering so anemically (we need both supply AND demand, not just supply). It would make for a stronger, healthier, more prosperous nation for everyone if we could re-balance things back towards the masses a bit and away from the wealthy.

Looking at the big picture, it's fairly obvious what has happened over the last 30 years. It has to do with a battle between the forces trying to raise wages, and the forces trying to raise assets. The asset side, of course, has won this battle in both parties.

Like I said in a previous post. A lot of people operate under the assumption of a finite amount of wealth. "If a rich person has $100 dollars, that's $100 that the rest of us don't have". It's just not true.

Wait, what?  The assumption that wealth is finite is invalid?  Explain.
Also it's not so much that the rich person that has $100 that someone else could, it's that the extra $100 in the hands of someone who already has $2,000,000 in their bank account is less likely to spend that incremental $100 than the family who is living paycheck to paycheck on $30,000 /yr...so its win-win: improving quality of life of the less fortunate and also getting money flowing through the economy.

Now in terms of corporate welfare, the same may not necessarily hold true, as different industries have different levels of operatin ...


That $100 isn't sitting in their bank account. It's invested in some form or fashion in the economy. That $100 isn't taken out of the pool.

This is the exact reason that our schools should teach more economic/financial classes.
2013-05-21 12:50:55 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.



Yeah, when will the rich ever catch a break in this country?

 cdn.socialtrade.com

www.doctorhousingbubble.com

Gosh, I just don't know where this frustration comes from.   Just jealous, I guess.
2013-05-21 12:46:51 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Almet: Pappy091: This just in, rich people pay FAR more in taxes (both percentage-wise...

Warren Buffet disagrees

Well, I am in generally in a higher tax bracket and I can promise you that I pay much higher taxes than my employees do. While they generally get a few thousand back every year, I have to make significant quarterly payments to Uncle Sam with no return at tax time.



Wow... they're real Lucky Duckies ain't they?

prolecenter.files.wordpress.com
2013-05-21 12:34:14 PM
1 votes:
For these threads about the evils of the rich people is why I have this...

imageshack.us

Am I just not being open minded about the superfluous rich?
I mean, I like Warren Buffet because he has some form of conscious. Eh?
How much of G.E. does he own?
2013-05-21 12:34:03 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: This is still America, where you are responsible for your life. Everyone has the opportunity to be successful, however they define success. Redistribution of wealth is not the way to raise the lower/middle class. Better education with an emphasis on financial smarts is a good start though.



We already HAVE wealth redistribution, and have had it since the late 70's...

For the average American wages have risen around 24% since 1979.... but at the same time cost of living has risen over 60%. That means the average American is poorer then their parents and grandparents were. The proportion of those living below the poverty line has also risen.

Meanwhile the very wealthy have increased their wealth during that same time period by over 280%. The wealth IS being redistributed upwards - and sharply. Corporate profits have also risen sharply during this period while worker productivity rises as well. No one in the middle and bottom is seeing any of those gains. They are entirely being consumed by the already wealthy - AND MORE.

This is not a recipe for long-term national success. Demand is important to any economic system, and we have almost entirely neglected demand in favor of "supply side" type economics for decades now. That was dumb. WIthout anyone who can afford products, who are they going to be sold to? This is why our economic recovery has been so anemic. That will only continue to worsen as these trends continue, and the end result will eventually be a society of permenant, fixed classes/castes - with the lower castes in a form of indentured servitude.
2013-05-21 12:31:48 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: I believe it is a false belief that the middle class is suffering.

It isn't false. It's a fact that wages are at historic lows. It's a fact that half the jobs in America pay less than $34,000 a year. It's a fact that without government assistance, 30% of our population would live in poverty. It's a fact that one in five children in the U.S. lives in poverty. You can ignore it, as most of our politicians and media does, or you can accept it and decide whether this is how you think the richest most powerful nation in the world should operate.

I think that most of the world laughs their asses of at America's definition of poverty. I'm not saying that the lower class should be content, but our definition of classes is way out of whack with the rest of the world. Just look at the quality of life that the lower/middle classes have today compared to 50 years ago.

This is still America, where you are responsible for your life. Everyone has the opportunity to be successful, however they define success. Redistribution of wealth is not the way to raise the lower/middle class. Better education with an emphasis on financial smarts is a good start though.


Cool, so we should be holding our standard of living to what the world thinks is appropriate?  Since a poor person in Bangladesh things a poor person in New York is rich that means the person in New York is really just a complainer.  I mean, 98% of poor households in the U.S have a refrigerator, poor my ass, right?
2013-05-21 12:29:19 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Dusk-You-n-Me: Pappy091: Just look at the quality of life that the lower/middle classes have today compared to 50 years ago.

Hey what a coincidence, 40% of Americans now make less than the 1968 minimum wage. Things are totally better.

Pappy091: Redistribution of wealth is not the way to raise the lower/middle class

Sure it is. That's what taxes are, a redistribution of wealth. Those who have been successful need to pay back the country that facilitated their wealth. It's We the People, not Me the Person. I don't have kids, but I don't mind paying for public schools because it enhances the public good, and that's good for everybody - poor, middle, and rich.

I MIGHT be able to see some reason in that argument if I thought that for one second our government was good stewards of our money.

 Yes, they're terrible stewards, which is why we no longer have an army and were conquered by commies, and we aren't a superpower, and we don't enjoy a high standard of living....
2013-05-21 12:23:42 PM
1 votes:

Pappy091: I agree that lobbyist are a huge problem. Campaign finance reform and TERM LIMITS are our only hope of solving that problem.

Most of your points revolve around the common misconception that there is a finite amount of wealth in the country that is being hoarded to a greater and greater extent by the wealthy. These people aren't burying gold in their back yards. They are invested in the economy. Their wealth is measure by and large by their assets, not cash.



False. I said no such thing, nor do I believe it. But look at what's happened to corporate profits and worker productivity during this period of severe upwards wealth redistribution. Wealth HAS been created and it is all going straight to the top of the income pyramid. As the pool of the nation's wealth has grown ever larger no one is seeing it except for a small, already afluent, segment of our society.

And the wealthy don't sit on wealth by burying it in the backyard - that's something you're more likely to see the poor do (hide it in mattresses and such). The wealthy hide it in offshore accounts, tax havens, bank accounts, hedge funds, expensive durable goods, jewels, bearer bonds, expensive foreign villas, etc. etc...

One way to solve the "advantage" that they descendants of wealthy parents have is to teach all of our children better fiscal responsibility as they grow. I have been a proponent for years for have mandatory financial classes taught to all children every year starting at a very young age. It is actually very easy to retire a multi-millionaire in this country. All you need to do is have a plan in place. The sooner the better. Very few people realize this.

False. Fiscal responsibility is a basic skill we should indeed teach our youth, but it will absolutely not solve our problems whatsoever.

For one thing, I suspect that you're relying on a misconception that wealthy children are more fiscally responsible then poor children. Not only do I seriously doubt that they are, I'd suggest they're more likely to be personally irresposible, as they have employees who are paid to manage their finances for them.

But MUCH more importantly than that, the wealthy take disproportionate advantage of our economic system then the poor do in a vast myriad of ways. Someone poor may have an idea for a product or business but be unable to easily capitalize on it - if at all. The children of the wealthy (and wealthy themselves) tend to have the capital backing they need without much effort. The children of the poor have a harder time affording higher education - if they can manage to afford it at all - while the wealthy send their kids to whatever school they would like, which also tend to be schools where the wealthy children congregate thus ensuring them more lucrative networking then is available to poor children. Poor families pay more of their income to taxes, wealthy families don't become insolvent when the primary wage earner becomes sick or is laid off, wealthy families don't have the same stresses that poor families do trying to survive each day - which has a developmental cost for the children. The poor families are more likely to go to jail or suffer financial penalties which harm them to a far greater degree then wealthy families for the same criminal infractions. Small costs or fines may make the food or rent budget hard to meet, whereas a wealthy family doesn't have that problem. Etc. etc. etc....... You could go on all day long like that.

There are a million ways the wealthy are advantaged just by being wealthy. So in addition to the head start they got by starting out wealthy (the starting conditions) the accumulated million different advantages they continue to enjoy throughout their lives while competing ensure that they STAY wealthy for generations. This is why there's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with a progressive tax system. You tax the wealthy at a higher rate because they disproportionately benefit from society - and then use that money to continue running the society writ large and helping level the playing field for those at the bottom (increased education spending, maintaining the infrastructure the poor rely on proportionally more, etc.). I'd argue it's immoral to have anything BUT a progressive tax system. Unfortunately, because of the disproportionate power the wealthy wield over our government the tax system we currently have is actually fairly regressive right now.
2013-05-21 12:19:09 PM
1 votes:
Appel literally has so much cash (not profits, not operating capital, actually excess CASH) that it is becoming a signficant problem for them on how and where to store it.  They've created a hedge fund for it, Braebrun, that is the single largest hedge fund in the world now.  Despite all this, they STILL feel the need to go to exteme lengths to chisel the last cent they can out of thier tax obligations and essentially refuse to say "thank you" to all those countries who legal, physical and poltical infrastructures make their operations possible and profitable.   Sickening really, but what do expect from a sompany built in the personal image of a confirmed sociopath?
2013-05-21 12:01:48 PM
1 votes:

farker99: Just in - Apple is a corporation doing what all other corporations do to reduce their tax burden. Interviews with Google, HP, IBM, and other tech giants show that they do the same thing and some even got called to testify on it last year.

/This is Apples turn in the barrel


Will you still feel this way when it's Exxon or Halliburton?
2013-05-21 11:44:16 AM
1 votes:

Pappy091: hugram: Pappy091: Anyway, as another poster said, most of this discussion is directed to the wealthy which I am most certainly not.

Then why are you defending the very wealthy for paying less in taxes (from a percentage point of view) instead of defending people like you and I, who pay more from a percentage point of view?

I am saying that if any of the people that complain about this were to find themselves in the "1%", then they are going to use the exact same "loopholes" they are complaining about today. I don't have a problem eliminating most loopholes. I think that an overall simpler tax code is a very good thing. What I have a problem with is everyone hating rich people and big companies. You used to be looked up to for being successful in this country. Now it something to almost be ashamed of.


No, no I wouldn't.

I have something called ethics.  It's the very reason I currently pay my full tax liability.
2013-05-21 11:40:54 AM
1 votes:

mongbiohazard: That's not to say we don't need any rich or should dissolve all large corporations... but we do need to re-balance the system which has tilted so very far in favor of them already. That lack of balance is why for decades now the average American has steadily become more and more impoverished and the weathiest have been getting wealthier at an increasing pace (which is where the wealth of the poor and middle class has been re-distributed to).

The money which is piling up and stagnating in those piles of dynastic wealth should be circulating through the economy instead. There's a reason why our economy is so fragile now, and recovering so anemically (we need both supply AND demand, not just supply). It would make for a stronger, healthier, more prosperous nation for everyone if we could re-balance things back towards the masses a bit and away from the wealthy.


Looking at the big picture, it's fairly obvious what has happened over the last 30 years. It has to do with a battle between the forces trying to raise wages, and the forces trying to raise assets. The asset side, of course, has won this battle in both parties.
2013-05-21 11:35:10 AM
1 votes:

t3knomanser: mongbiohazard: They WANT deductions, loopholes and other complexity in the tax code - as much complexity as possible - because they can hide behind that complexity.

That's not entirely false, but there's something else going on here.  Taxation is a complex problem. Simple tax systems- like say, the so-called "Fair Tax"- are deeply unfair and highly regressive. Complex tax systems  also end up being deeply unfair, because complexity creates confusion. It's simple to say, "Taxation should be fair," but it's much  much harder to identify what "fair" is.


I absolutely agree that a Flat/Fair tax would be awful, is regressive and is exactly what new age robber barons want.

However a simple tax system does not necessarily equal a flat tax. For instance a simpler tax system could just include different asset brackets, but just no (or fewer) deductions. There are many ways we could reduce complexity in the tax code without scrapping an ostensibly progressive (it's really pretty regressive right now as things stand) tax system entirely. I'd be happy if we lowered some of the rates but did away with ALL deductions. Instead of screwing with deductions and exemptions (which are disporportionately utilized by the wealthy) to hide the real rates, just put the rates where we want them to be and drop the facade.

But that's not likely to happen because it's part of the dance politicians play to keep getting votes from the public while also continuing to get their bribes lobbying/campaign money from the business community. Have rates supposedly high enough to appease to the proles, but include a bunch of opaque ways the wealthy can avoid actually paying any of it to appease the wealthy who bankroll them.
2013-05-21 11:29:06 AM
1 votes:

Phinn: On the one hand, there the idea that someone, somewhere might be profiting without the gubment getting a cut ... Bbbbbut tax-killing Apple might interfere with the next generation of iPad .... What is a Hipster Leftist to do?


You're trying too hard. Subtlety, my son... you gotta lead the fish before you start jerking the bait.
2013-05-21 11:20:27 AM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: you have pee hands: Thunderpipes: BS.

I guarantee you a gigantic chunk of liberal progressive hippie Obama voters own Apple products.

I have been saying it all along, why no outrage over "Big Apple" like people demonize oil companies? We all depend on oil, their profit margins are low. Apple makes useless crap with large profit margins nobody really needs, and is sitting on more money than any other corporation on Earth.

I think we should come up with a federal smart phone tax, and make it big, say, 15% of the purchase price, at minimum. If you are going to tax the bajesus out of the stuff that gets us to work, and ships our goods, you can tax toys for the dumb masses.

Your response has nothing to do with my post.  It also doesn't make any sense.  People in this thread are demonizing Apple for using tax loopholes and advocating taxing them more, and some of them are even liberals.  Also, specific taxes on specific products further complicates the tax structure, something I'd think a "conservative" would be against.

People in this thread are full of crap. My point is obvious. If liberals really cared about the welfare of the country, and fair taxation, none of this would be a problem. And let's face it, nothing will be done about Apple, because most Apple product owners vote Democrat. It is all about votes.

Personally, I think, good for Apple. Only way this will ever truly be solved is to make the US an attractive place to do business. Right now this is a terrible place to do business. You are punished for being successful. Why not outsource and hide your money?


Libbiest lib lib evar here.


Android/PC user.

Neener
2013-05-21 11:20:14 AM
1 votes:

Pappy091: Anyway, as another poster said, most of this discussion is directed to the wealthy which I am most certainly not.


Then why are you defending the very wealthy for paying less in taxes (from a percentage point of view) instead of defending people like you and I, who pay more from a percentage point of view?
2013-05-21 11:14:00 AM
1 votes:

mongbiohazard: They WANT deductions, loopholes and other complexity in the tax code - as much complexity as possible - because they can hide behind that complexity.


That's not entirely false, but there's something else going on here.  Taxation is a complex problem. Simple tax systems- like say, the so-called "Fair Tax"- are deeply unfair and highly regressive. Complex tax systems  also end up being deeply unfair, because complexity creates confusion. It's simple to say, "Taxation should be fair," but it's much  much harder to identify what "fair" is.
2013-05-21 11:12:23 AM
1 votes:

Phinn: DeathCipris: Rmoney, Donald Trump, every celebrity member of the church of Scientology, Bill Gates...should I keep going?

John Forbes Kerry, all of Hollywood, etc.

Here's a way to "solve" the under-taxation "problem" -- let's slap a 95% tax on all entertainment profits, at every level of the production and distribution chain, across all industries (sports, music, movies, etc.).  They're non-essential products and services, like cigarettes and liquor.  Entertainment is, by definition, a luxury.

Sure, the luxury tax invariably kills luxury industries, and Hollywood is a huge donor to Democrats, but that isn't a good reason to let them get away with not paying their Fair Share.

And what's with all the Slave Labor working for free on movies?  The highest-paid worker should get no more than, say, five times what the lowest-paid worker gets.  So, the interns should be fairly compensated compared to Matt Damon and George Clooney.

"We" should "ask" them to pay "more."

"We" have to "do something."

Who's with me on this Tax the Crap Out of Hollywood Campaign?


Your reductio ad absurdum argument advocating communism with a sprinkling of teatard nonsense will get you no where.

0/10
2013-05-21 11:11:43 AM
1 votes:

Dusk-You-n-Me: As global capital becomes ever more powerful, giant corporations are holding governments and citizens up for ransom - eliciting subsidies and tax breaks from countries concerned about their nation's "competitiveness" - while sheltering their profits in the lowest-tax jurisdictions they can find. Major advanced countries - and their citizens - need a comprehensive tax agreement that won't allow global corporations to get away with this.

Google, Amazon, Starbucks, every other major corporation, and every big Wall Street bank, are sheltering as much of their U.S. profits abroad as they can, while telling Washington that lower corporate taxes are necessary in order to keep the U.S. "competitive."

Baloney. The fact is, global corporations have no allegiance to any country; their only objective is to make as much money as possible - and play off one country against another to keep their taxes down and subsidies up, thereby shifting more of the tax burden to ordinary people whose wages are already shrinking because companies are playing workers off against each other.


The more reason to start treating tax evasion/avoidance much like a variant of terrorism.  Leave no place to hide, no reward for creative accounting, no way to play nations against each other.

Unlike most of the world, the US has the assets to effectively moot jurisdiction - if it so pleases.  Perhaps it is time to use them.
2013-05-21 11:02:48 AM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: BS.

I guarantee you a gigantic chunk of liberal progressive hippie Obama voters own Apple products.

I have been saying it all along, why no outrage over "Big Apple" like people demonize oil companies? We all depend on oil, their profit margins are low. Apple makes useless crap with large profit margins nobody really needs, and is sitting on more money than any other corporation on Earth.

I think we should come up with a federal smart phone tax, and make it big, say, 15% of the purchase price, at minimum. If you are going to tax the bajesus out of the stuff that gets us to work, and ships our goods, you can tax toys for the dumb masses.


Your response has nothing to do with my post.  It also doesn't make any sense.  People in this thread are demonizing Apple for using tax loopholes and advocating taxing them more, and some of them are even liberals.  Also, specific taxes on specific products further complicates the tax structure, something I'd think a "conservative" would be against.
2013-05-21 10:59:12 AM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: you have pee hands: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

They're not the problem to the extent that they're just a byproduct of a system of taxation that's regressive beyond the point of upper middle / lower upper class, but they sure lobby like hell to keep things that way.

BS.

I guarantee you a gigantic chunk of liberal progressive hippie Obama voters own Apple products.

I have been saying it all along, why no outrage over "Big Apple" like people demonize oil companies? We all depend on oil, their profit margins are low. Apple makes useless crap with large profit margins nobody really needs, and is sitting on more money than any other corporation on Earth.

I think we should come up with a federal smart phone tax, and make it big, say, 15% of the purchase price, at minimum. If you are going to tax the bajesus out of the stuff that gets us to work, and ships our goods, you can tax toys for the dumb masses.


Or how bout close the loopholes that lets Apple and all the other mega-corporations sit on the mountain of gold they have? Why pass on yet another tax to the working class?

/Apple sucks
2013-05-21 10:58:57 AM
1 votes:

t3knomanser: You're the jerk... jerk: Do you have an argument that it is more efficient to tax the corporate entity rather than the stock holders?

Because the shareholders are already taxed on any dividends they receive, and a corporation is under no obligation to pay them dividends in the first place. If a corporation make $1B, and the shareholders receive $0 of that $1B, why would we tax the share holders?

What, exactly, are the share holders paying taxes on, if not the income they receive from their shares?


Ask yourself a question, if a corporation is profiting $1B and not paying a dividend (or the equivalent such as share buy backs) what are they doing with it?

Capital Gains taxes are paid on the increase in share price from time of purchase.
2013-05-21 10:55:34 AM
1 votes:

you have pee hands: Pappy091: My main complaint is how we are demonizing rich people/ large companies in this country. I just don't get it. They aren't the problem. It just gets under my skin when I see it.

They're not the problem to the extent that they're just a byproduct of a system of taxation that's regressive beyond the point of upper middle / lower upper class, but they sure lobby like hell to keep things that way.


BS.

I guarantee you a gigantic chunk of liberal progressive hippie Obama voters own Apple products.

I have been saying it all along, why no outrage over "Big Apple" like people demonize oil companies? We all depend on oil, their profit margins are low. Apple makes useless crap with large profit margins nobody really needs, and is sitting on more money than any other corporation on Earth.

I think we should come up with a federal smart phone tax, and make it big, say, 15% of the purchase price, at minimum. If you are going to tax the bajesus out of the stuff that gets us to work, and ships our goods, you can tax toys for the dumb masses.
2013-05-21 10:47:36 AM
1 votes:

You're the jerk... jerk: jshine: You're the jerk... jerk: Corporate taxes are silly/ridiculous. What is gained from taxing the corporate entity as opposed to those who own it?

Corporations are people too, my friend.

Do you have something meaningful to add to the conversation? Do you have an argument that it is more efficient to tax the corporate entity rather than the stock holders?


Romney's quip may be glib, but its not really inaccurate.  They are (legal) "people" in most senses of the word, with most of the same rights & responsibilities.  I can't see any reason why they should get an exemption on taxation unless they're willing to also give up the other benefits of "personhood" -- i.e., free speech rights, the ability to absorb legal liability rather than passing it on to their owners, etc...  Why should a fictitious entity be treated as a person for the purpose of granting legal rights & benefits, but not for the purpose of tax liability?
2013-05-21 10:47:17 AM
1 votes:

theorellior: The more I parse it, the more I think Pappy091 is trolling everyone. The tone of that post reminds me of the "top-shelf pussy" frat troll.



He thinks because he owns Jefferson County Investments, LLC he qualifies as "rich".  He doesn't realize that the rich we're talking about are orders of magnitude wealthier than him.

Another one of the 5% thinking they're part of the .005%
2013-05-21 10:42:47 AM
1 votes:
The very rich people and large corporations utilize loopholes in our tax code, just like Apple does FTA.
No need to increase taxes or lower them if you are some backwards GOP moron. Just close the farking loopholes so the ultra rich and corporations can pay a proportionate amount like the rest of the working class...
2013-05-21 10:33:23 AM
1 votes:

Quiefenburger: cman: Tim Cook could shiat down the throats of everyone and they will like it because he is Apple Apple did nothing against the law.
ftfy


Its still very telling what you left in place...
2013-05-21 10:32:39 AM
1 votes:

Pappy091: I have to make significant quarterly payments to Uncle Sam with no return at tax time.


You do know you're not supposed to get money back for filing 941s, right?
2013-05-21 10:31:31 AM
1 votes:

pute kisses like a man: you got some double dutch in my irish sandwich... or whatever they call it.

i wonder, would the US make more in tax revenue if it decreased taxes?  there is a point where it's not worth the financial complexity and costs of professional hours to avoid paying taxes.  or, should it just legislate out the possibility of these clever tactics?  not that it would work.  tax people would find a new loophole, or just leave.


  In terms of corporate tax, what is needed is a combination of lowering the nominal tax rate and closing a lot of the loopholes.  Our nominal rate is 35%, so conservatives tend to latch onto that number saying that corporations pay way too much tax here. But the reality is that our effective corporate tax rate, due to various subsidies, tax breaks and loop holes, is somewhere in the range of 12-16%, and many corporations pay no taxes at all.
   The biggest loopholes are the ones like Apple is exploiting to offshore the money to what is essentially a shell company, and similar ways to create giant write-offs.

 I'd be in favor of congress lowing the statutory rate to something in the high teens or low 20s, close the loopholes, and then add some tax breaks that will increase job creation.  For example, a lot of companies complain they can't find employees with the skills they need (because they're usually looking for something stupid like 5 years experience with software only they use).   Offer companies reasonable tax breaks/incentives to train new employees with the skills they need (with the incentive based on the amount of training required), as long as they keep that employee for at least 12 months after training is complete.
2013-05-21 10:30:41 AM
1 votes:

cman: Tim Cook could shiat down the throats of everyone and they will like it because he is Apple Apple did nothing against the law.


ftfy
GBB
2013-05-21 10:28:53 AM
1 votes:
You know what I would love to see?  I would love to see a major corporation track their expenses for trying to dodge taxes, combine it with their current tax liability, and take that the US Govt and say, "THIS is what we are willing to pay", and be done with it.
2013-05-21 10:27:03 AM
1 votes:
Gulper Eel:

1) No US taxes, but also 1a) no US subsidies

I think the current system of low-to-no taxes and generous subsidies is much preferred.

That doesn't even get into the subsidies and tax breaks that local governments give away.  The reason your plan will never happen is not because of some ideological intransigence on the part of politicians.  I think you'll agree that politicians have no ideology when no one's looking.

It's because nobody with skin in the game (corporations) wants it your way.  The most powerful people are most benefiting from the current system and the current system keeps the same people in power.

Nothing is going to change and I don't really care for it to.  My investments are set up for this system.
2013-05-21 10:25:28 AM
1 votes:
I was paying taxes in the US, but then like, I created a fictitious offshore shell corporation that totally reduced my tax liability.  'Cause taxes are like, a bummer.

www.wired.com

Introducing iDontPayMyTaxes®
GBB
2013-05-21 10:24:08 AM
1 votes:

pute kisses like a man: you got some double dutch in my irish sandwich... or whatever they call it.

i wonder, would the US make more in tax revenue if it decreased taxes?  there is a point where it's not worth the financial complexity and costs of professional hours to avoid paying taxes.  or, should it just legislate out the possibility of these clever tactics?  not that it would work.  tax people would find a new loophole, or just leave.


This is what I was thinking.  I think the only way to actually get this done is to offer to Rebuplicans a lower corporate tax rate, but also attach legislation that eliminates many loopholes.  If they turn it down, then they look petty for not accepting what they've been asking for.
2013-05-21 10:22:57 AM
1 votes:
"This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft."

This is the way that congress makes taxes laws that favor themselves. Corporations (and many individuals) take advantage of legal means created by them to pay less on the income they earn. If they did not they would not be doing "due diligence" for the share holders, which is what capitalism is all about. You can also take advantage of the same laws by creating the same environment for your self, and then using the same laws to benefit your self (and your share holders).

If it's unfair, then it's been unfairly created. So we should look to the congress who created these "Loop holes" (which there not, the are written in the bills passed) to see where they benefit from passing these kinds of laws. A corporation is categorized as "A person" and a person would be a fool to give away more money then legally required.

So just follow the money, and see you get's it, then see how the lobbiests got the bill passed, then you will find your "Loop hole" for all it's worth.
2013-05-21 10:20:38 AM
1 votes:
Two words: unitary taxation.
2013-05-21 10:19:44 AM
1 votes:
The big companies don't mind corporate taxes at all, because they can buy themselves ways around paying.

It's the smaller outfits that can't buy legislators around the world who take it in the shorts.

The game is hopelessly rigged from the start, and any attempt to patch things is only going to result in more loopholes - so the only way to win is to kick over the board. Want to have the world's businesses beating a path to our door, with the Apples of the world pouring resources into employees instead of politicians? Put this on the table:

1) No US taxes, but also 1a) no US subsidies
2) A slight just-in-case upward bump for top individual income tax rates, subject to downward revision if tax revenue numbers look good enough
3) Now, about those regulations  you were biatching about because of the cost. Looks like a lot of that cost got taken care of since you don't have to pay all those extra tax accountants, tax lawyers and tax lobbyists any more.
2013-05-21 10:18:34 AM
1 votes:
Just in - Apple is a corporation doing what all other corporations do to reduce their tax burden. Interviews with Google, HP, IBM, and other tech giants show that they do the same thing and some even got called to testify on it last year.

/This is Apples turn in the barrel
2013-05-21 10:13:20 AM
1 votes:

unlikely: So I'm fuzzy on this. Do we hate loopholes that allow corporations to dodge taxes or not? Exxon and Halliburton might not like it if the answer is "yes we hate them, close those loopholes."


Quoted for truth.
2013-05-21 10:11:28 AM
1 votes:
you got some double dutch in my irish sandwich... or whatever they call it.

i wonder, would the US make more in tax revenue if it decreased taxes?  there is a point where it's not worth the financial complexity and costs of professional hours to avoid paying taxes.  or, should it just legislate out the possibility of these clever tactics?  not that it would work.  tax people would find a new loophole, or just leave.
2013-05-21 10:08:09 AM
1 votes:

Walker: This just in (please sit down): Corporations and rich people find ways to avoid paying taxes, while the little people get audited, fined, and basically get the shaft.

/more at 11


This.

Pocket Ninja: I'm sure this only relates to their ongoing concern about work conditions in their Chinese factories. They're still working so hard to correct the rampant abuses that their in-depth investigations uncovered in places like FoxConn, and what they're probably thinking is that when it's time to start spending some money on improving those factories and giving the employees something closer to a living wage that moves them beyond what are essentially slave conditions, it'll be good to have the money closer by. See, if the money was all the way in America, it would be harder to get it there than if it was already in a foreign country overseas. They should be lauded for their concerned efficiency.


Brilliant.
 
Displayed 114 of 114 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report