Protestors "Occupy Wall St."

[Pahonu]

Warren Buffet should be commended for binging the ultra-rich tax issue to the fore. The fact that it's even a difficult issue (raising income tax on the country's multi-billionaires to that of normal folk) shows how much power this small group wields in Washington. Did someone say democracy?

Buffet, and the current administration, are making the intellectually dishonest comparison between income taxes and capital gains taxes in their class warfare rhetoric and are hoping the majority of the uninformed masses won’t see thru the BS. Raising the capitals gains tax would hurt everyone (not just the rich) and crush the US economy even further. And it is all of us (not just the rich) who are going to get hit with new taxes, fees, and higher insurance rates thanks to the current tax and spend focus in Washington, especially when Obamacare is fully implemented.

Before falling into the trap of class warfare and demonizing anyone keep in mind that the U.S. tax system is already heavily weighted at the top. The top one percent of income earners pay 38 percent of all federal income taxes, the top 5 percent pay 59%, and the top 10% pay 70%. The bottom 50 percent pay only 3 percent and 49 percent of U.S. households pays no federal income tax at all. The government needs to cut the spending and waste before imposing more taxes on anyone. No more "stimulus" packages (we can see how well the first one worked)!

The collapse of the housing market (thank Barney Frank for refusing to regulate Fannie/Freddie and the banks for bundling the known shady loans) was the key trigger for the recession and the resulting bailout of Fannie/Freddie, the banks, and auto companies is sickening. I personally hate it and wish that the companies were forced to fold, however I do acknowledge that without TARP the economy would likely be much worse right now. As usual the government dropped the ball and dished out the TARP money with few strings attached and now the banks are stingy on lending money which is hurting economic growth. In this respect I feel the same frustrations as the Wall Street protestors and would gladly line up a bunch of the politicians and CEO's so the mob could throw their hacky sacks at them. However the "movement" has evolved into a conglomeration of a bunch of left wing idelogs and conspiracy theorists who are getting funding & support from the unions and George Soros so they will struggle to gain credibility (except on NBC news of course!).

The folks need to remember what made this country great, hard working Americans with a great work ethic, innovative spirit, and entrepreneurship. The entitlement mentality, lining up for government handouts, and getting into the mindset of punishing those who work hard and are successful in an effort to redistribute the wealth will ruin this country. How does it look like it is working out for Europe/Greece?

Sorry for the rant, I don’t want to get super political here or start an argument with anyone who has their own strong beliefs, as this forum is not the place to do so. All I ask is that people inform themselves on the issues and then make up their minds about what really makes the most common sense. Don’t get sucked into believing the rhetoric from either side, as it is usually designed to be either populist or simply pandering to the idelogs in the extremes of their given parties.

I don't believe it's intellectually dishonest to look at differing tax structures and understand how they effect household earnings. Why tax one kind of income differently than another? Capital gains is income, just not wages or a salary, but still income. You also have to look at a household's entire tax burden. True, the federal income tax is progressive, but that is only part of the tax burden on many households. Federal excise taxes such as on gasoline are flat rates, sales and property taxes at the state level are also flat, and these take a diproportionately higher percentage of the working and middle class incomes. A $1000-$2000 sales tax on a new or even used car is far more massive burden when you earn $30,000 versus $250,000. While on a slightly different subject, Warren Buffet has also pointed out the unfairness of the property tax situation here in California where he pays less property tax on his multi-million dollar beach house in Laguna Beach than he does on his childhood home in Oklahoma. There is real validity in constantly reevaluating tax structure for equitability, and perhaps something to be said for taxing consumption rather than income such as the VAT.

I would also argue that if you want to blame the banks for risky lending practices you have to start with the deregulation begun in the 1980's such as ending Glass-Steagall, and continuing under subsequent administrations. The consumer Financial Protection Bureau that is being put in place now may never have been necessary if the strict separtion of investment banking and commercial banking were still in place. Styles hit the nail on the head in regards to Canada's and Switzerland's more strict banking sector regulations. True no nation is insulated from the world economy, but bank failures from the end of the Great Depression until the end of Glass-Steagall in the 80's were fewer than in this last economic downturn alone.

Also, most economists agree that both TARP and the stimulus have been successful. TARP has cost taxpayers substantilally less as a percentage of GDP than the S&L bailout of the 80's, and averted a much bigger banking crises. The stimulas has resulted by most estimates in the unemployment rate being 1-1.5% lower than without, and that translates to a couple of million fewer workers in the unemployment lines. While neither is particularly popular with the general public, without them the situation would undoubtedly be worse.

Styles, the comparison to the New Deal was in regards to direct relief to the population in the form of public works and job creation programs, and domestic policy can certainly still impact this area. Short economic downturns can often be weathered without major government intervention, but the current situation certainly can't be called short term, and call for some level of involvement. The big question, of course, is currently being argued by both left and right.

By the way, I also agree this is a positive dialogue even with widely differing opinions. Too bad Washington seems to be having nothing of the kind.

[ConchRepublican]

usefulness of centralised benevolent dictatorship like we see Beijing

[Styles Bitchley]

usefulness of centralised benevolent dictatorship like we see Beijing

Haha. Not implying that I endorse such a thing!

[KENJI]

I have no problem paying my fair share of tax like most people. It allows us to have paved roads, hospitals, police and fire, parks etc, etc, etc and when you look at the conditions of third world countries we have it really good. When tax dollars are wasted and there is no accountabilty for it, that is where the masses have issues with handing over their hard earned money to the government. I know at my house, I have to budget for everything and when the money runs out I'm accountable for my decisions. If there is no money to go to "Hawaii", put in a pool, pay for gas etc, then you adjust your spending habits like it or not! Putting it on the credit card is not the answer when you have no way of paying it back and that is what the government is doing - printing more money and spending on things that fulfil short term wants like getting elected or staying in power. At some point, there has to be discomfort (which everyones hates) to get your house in order or you sweep it under the rug until the rug and house are finally taken away from you. The government has the blinders on and the people are now telling them that enough is enough ,you're destroying this great country for personal and political gains and the taxpayers wallet is almost empty, so new taxation is not the answer. Lead by example and cut the fat starting at the top and that would go along way, but I doubt very much that will happen, as the buck will be passed on down to the middle and lower classes and the animosity will continue to escalate. The country needs to go on a financial diet sort of speak before it flatlines.

[Pahonu]

I have no problem paying my fair share of tax like most people. It allows us to have paved roads, hospitals, police and fire, parks etc, etc, etc and when you look at the conditions of third world countries we have it really good. When tax dollars are wasted and there is no accountabilty for it, that is where the masses have issues with handing over their hard earned money to the government. I know at my house, I have to budget for everything and when the money runs out I'm accountable for my decisions. If there is no money to go to "Hawaii", put in a pool, pay for gas etc, then you adjust your spending habits like it or not! Putting it on the credit card is not the answer when you have no way of paying it back and that is what the government is doing - printing more money and spending on things that fulfil short term wants like getting elected or staying in power. At some point, there has to be discomfort (which everyones hates) to get your house in order or you sweep it under the rug until the rug and house are finally taken away from you. The government has the blinders on and the people are now telling them that enough is enough ,you're destroying this great country for personal and political gains and the taxpayers wallet is almost empty, so new taxation is not the answer. Lead by example and cut the fat starting at the top and that would go along way, but I doubt very much that will happen, as the buck will be passed on down to the middle and lower classes and the animosity will continue to escalate. The country needs to go on a financial diet sort of speak before it flatlines.

Unfortunately "cutting the fat" will not take us very far in reducing the deficit. When polled, the majority of Americans do not want ot see any cuts in several programs including Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. Large percentages also don't want cuts in defense. Add to that the interest on the debt and you are left with a slice of the pie that is less than one fifth of the total budget, and that is for everything else you mentioned like roads, bridges, police, etc... The "pork" in the budget while incredibly large in real numbers, is just a tiny fraction of the total budget. It really is a fallacy to think we could cut only this "pork" and solve what is really a larger strutural issue with the budget.

In terms of taxation, the current tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is lower now than it was in the 90's. For most of the 90's the revenue was between 28% and 30% of GDP and economic growth including job creation was massive. Since the two Bush tax cuts took effect that number has dropped below 27% of GDP, so the argument that we are taxed more today than ever is also not valid. It might also might be argued that those tax cuts did not lead to the job creation the Bush administration touted. Also, this total tax burden is lower than most industrialized nations including: Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and much lower than many other European nations. In fact, we rank below Japan and just above Mexico in tax burden as a percentage of GDP among industrialized nations.

The economy of a nation is also not exactly the same as a household budget primarily because of the Fed's ability to control monetary policy. The primary function of the Fed is to control the money supply in periods of economic expansion and contraction to try and ease the effects of inflation and unemployment that would vary much more dramatically otherwise. This is a very different concept than fiscal policy which decides how we spend those dollars and includes taxation rates and allocation of funds.

These are not simple problems with simple solutions, but we can't start to solve them by beginning with misinformation or making our decisions based on philosophical positions.

[The Birdman]

Sadly I don't think anyone who is currently running is going to make much differance. I live in one of the hardest hit states, highest unemployment (my county specifically) We lost 3 RV manufacturers, 2 boat builders and a bunch of other companies, each one employed hundreds of people. If we don't bring jobs back to the US I don't really see any future for the US. I've personally only works 4 weeks out of the last 3 years. I'm just not hearing any plans that sound solid. I'm guessing that because the US is "in bed" with China we can't just put embargos on imported stuff?? It'd probably cause serious reprecussions or something. The country got screwed up in about the last 15 years. I don't want to turn this into a Republican vs. Democrat thing, I don't know if could even be fixed by anyone at this point and after Bush I registered as a 3rd party because I'm disallusioned by everything right now. I try to buy american with anything I buy. Recently I've bought American made Corcoran boots and an American made Kershaw pocket knife.

"Buying American" these days isn't what it used to be. The international trading and manufacturing system is way more complex than it ever has been in history. Many goods that claim to be "made in x country" are often assembled there from components made in other countries. And just because something is a "foreign" product doesn't mean it doesn't create American jobs (e.g., Toyota plants in the US). It's just not as simple as placing an embargo on Chinese goods, which would empty the shelves of every Walmart, put millions out of work and pretty much crush the American economy among others!
I'm wary of any politician who is selling an easy answer to today's economic problems. There are some deep-seated problems with the way the "system" operates today and the youth are showing their anger - much like they have in previous generations and in other countries. Warren Buffet should be commended for binging the ultra-rich tax issue to the fore. The fact that it's even a difficult issue (raising income tax on the country's multi-billionaires to that of normal folk) shows how much power this small group wields in Washington. Did someone say democracy?

I can't agrre with that. Sure, if you banned all chinese goods tommarow, but I'm saying in the next 10 years. How about just charging a tax/tarrif to support the welfare system for all the out of work americans? I got a real eye opener a couple years ago when I started cleaning house and I was finding old boots, jeans and hats and stuff, stuff I had bought at wal mart 10-15 years ago, AND IT WAS MADE IN THE USA! Right now it is almost impossable to find anything made in the USA. People argue with me that to make things here they would "cost so much that nobody could buy them". Well, this stuff was not "expensive" 10-15 years ago. I did not bat an eye lash at buying American cowboy boots and american hat, american knife, ect. Right now our government is actually barrowing money from China just to keep afloat. FYI: I have HEARD that manufacturing is starting to come back to the US on its own BECAUSE the chinese are going union (higher wages) AND American companies that outsourced are now realizing there is a serious LACK OF QUALITY CONTROL.
The shelves at Wal Mart will simply be filled with more American made items, that's all.

[Jake]

[Also, most economists agree that both TARP and the stimulus have been successful.

You must be referring to the super-lefty NY Times economist/mouthpiece Paul Krugman who never met a government spending program he didn’t like. Other than the administration cronies and Krugman I haven’t heard any economists touting the stimulus as anything even close to successful. Maybe some other kool-aid drinkers might spew that opinion on MSBNC, but nobody really watches that propaganda do they??? [I see you’re in California so you might be a fan...LOL (sorry I just couldn’t resist)!] The "stimulus" was supposed to create a bunch of jobs and keep unemployment below 8% - it was a total failure. Where is the economic recovery and where the hell are the jobs??? It was a bloated lefty spending grab dished out in the worst ways with no accountability. If you worked for your local county road commission or were working on turtle crossing or shrimp treadmill research and received a grant you probably think differently about the program than I do. The current so-called "jobs bill" is nothing more than a stimulus2 and has no chance of passing in the form proposed by Obama, it couldn’t even pass the senate as fellow dems voted against it. It is a political stunt by Obama who starting the election grandstanding early.

We need to cut spending (across the board), do serious entitlement reform (regardless of how unpopular it might be in some circles), and reform the tax code (flat tax please) to get a handle on the debt and have even a shot at ever balancing the budget. Unfortunately in a highly partisan DC environment I have little confidence that our elected officials will actually get anything meaningful done.

[Styles Bitchley]

While on a slightly different subject, Warren Buffet has also pointed out the unfairness of the property tax situation here in California where he pays less property tax on his multi-million dollar beach house in Laguna Beach than he does on his childhood home in Oklahoma.

My brother in law just inherited his mother's home in Pebble Beach a stone's throw from the golf course and under California tax law, the property cannot be reassessed. So while the house would likely sell for several million bucks, my sister and her husband are paying taxes based on the value of the home in the 1960s. I think they pay a little over $1,000 a year! No wonder Sacramento's broke.

I can't agrre with that. Sure, if you banned all chinese goods tommarow, but I'm saying in the next 10 years. How about just charging a tax/tarrif to support the welfare system for all the out of work americans? I got a real eye opener a couple years ago when I started cleaning house and I was finding old boots, jeans and hats and stuff, stuff I had bought at wal mart 10-15 years ago, AND IT WAS MADE IN THE USA! Right now it is almost impossable to find anything made in the USA. People argue with me that to make things here they would "cost so much that nobody could buy them". Well, this stuff was not "expensive" 10-15 years ago. I did not bat an eye lash at buying American cowboy boots and american hat, american knife, ect. Right now our government is actually barrowing money from China just to keep afloat. FYI: I have HEARD that manufacturing is starting to come back to the US on its own BECAUSE the chinese are going union (higher wages) AND American companies that outsourced are now realizing there is a serious LACK OF QUALITY CONTROL.
The shelves at Wal Mart will simply be filled with more American made items, that's all.

I totally feel where you're coming from. I'm nostalgic about the good ole days when my Levis were made in the USA. But turning back the clock is harder than it appears.

First of all, erecting trade barriers just because you don't want to import goods from a certain country is illegal under WTO law. Basically, it would give China the right to erect their own trade barriers against US goods, which, believe it or not, would be very bad for the US economy. China has now surpassed the US as the world's largest consumer of new cars and Ford, Chrysler and GM are all lined up to get a bigger piece of that market.

Another line is formed behind the back of China, where an array of developing countries (India, Bangladesh, Brazil, etc.) are anxious to get a piece of China's manufacturing sector. If China wasn't there, somebody else would be and, trust me, they will work for cheaper than the average American. The only way you would be able to pay an American a liveable wage to manufacture the majority of goods consumed today is by subsidising the industry...which, of course, is illegal under WTO law.

I think there are a few notable exceptions though. American Apparel, for example, has managed to successfully make and sell their clothes in the US. But let's be realistic, a $24 T-Shirt ain't gonna sell at Walmart. But even that example isn't perfect as the founder and CEO is Canadian!

[Pahonu]

[Also, most economists agree that both TARP and the stimulus have been successful.

You must be referring to the super-lefty NY Times economist/mouthpiece Paul Krugman who never met a government spending program he didn’t like. Other than the administration cronies and Krugman I haven’t heard any economists touting the stimulus as anything even close to successful. Maybe some other kool-aid drinkers might spew that opinion on MSBNC, but nobody really watches that propaganda do they??? [I see you’re in California so you might be a fan...LOL (sorry I just couldn’t resist)!] The "stimulus" was supposed to create a bunch of jobs and keep unemployment below 8% - it was a total failure. Where is the economic recovery and where the hell are the jobs??? It was a bloated lefty spending grab dished out in the worst ways with no accountability. If you worked for your local county road commission or were working on turtle crossing or shrimp treadmill research and received a grant you probably think differently about the program than I do. The current so-called "jobs bill" is nothing more than a stimulus2 and has no chance of passing in the form proposed by Obama, it couldn’t even pass the senate as fellow dems voted against it. It is a political stunt by Obama who starting the election grandstanding early.

We need to cut spending (across the board), do serious entitlement reform (regardless of how unpopular it might be in some circles), and reform the tax code (flat tax please) to get a handle on the debt and have even a shot at ever balancing the budget. Unfortunately in a highly partisan DC environment I have little confidence that our elected officials will actually get anything meaningful done.

I'm not taking a personal shot here, but it is overly simplistic to say that because the stimulus didn't keep unemployment below 8% as predicted that "it was a total failure" to use your words. The majority of economists have stated it has been successful, creating between 1.2 and 2.8 million jobs. Unemployment would have been 1% to 1.5% higher according to the Congressional Budget Office http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967 . I would add that the CBO is the closest thing to a non-partisan group you will find anywhere near Washington. Your statement about MSNBC "propaganda" could equally be leveled at Fox News. If you have to put "Fair and Balanced" in the title of your news reports, there is reason to be suspect. It's like the person that keeps saying "Honestly". By the way, I tend to flip around among all three major cable news outlets quite a bit. You must be a fan of Stuart Varney. Am I right?

So to give you a few other names. Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics, believes an economic downturn closer to the Great Depression was averted because of the stimulus. John Taylor, Stanford University economics professor, has stated something very similar. The New Yorker, not exactly a left-wing rag with it's Jihad fist bump cover of the Obamas, has stated the stimulus has had clear but measured success. The CBO numbers mentioned earlier validate this claim.

I'm fairly centrist in my economic views, and I agree that the extremism on both sides has hurt progress in Washington, but judging by the language of your posts it appears you seem to be holding some of these extreme views from the right. Many of the social programs you seem to want to cut are favored by a large majority of Americans, and in a democracy that majority holds sway. Just look how Rick Perry is doing since his comments on Social Security. It is a massively popular program that needs to be constantly refined as happened during the Reagan years and with other presidencies. I know several people who believe some of these programs should be ended completely, but they are in a tiny minority and it simply won't happen. Also, the last time we had the highly regarded balanced budget was in the final years of the Clinton administration with higher total tax revenue as a percentage of GDP, and massively more job creation than anytime in the last decade. The statement that higher taxes hurt job creation is easily disproved by that simple fact, and you don't need any Kool-Aid to understand that!

[grundle]

This is fantastic!

It's the "Occupy Wall Street Protest Song":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QTfNEDgusQ

[PhatCat]

I really don't want to jump into the middle of this. There are political forums for this reason.

I WILL say that I recently finished two books that were very enlightening to me which should appeal to both "lefties" and "righties" alike.

Ron Paul's End the Fed is a great read and gives a lot of perspective on how the Federal Reserve has seriously messed up our country. Creating money out of thin air, resulting in inflation, is essentially a tax on every one of us. Not just "the rich" and not just "the poor." Everyone. It makes "fatcat" bankers even "fatter" and hurts middle income folks like you and me.

The other book I recommend is:

Jason Lewis's Power Divided is Power Checked: An argument for States' Rights. The idea of limited government makes sense on so many levels. Let the states be the testing grounds of policy. Rather than this "one size fits all" idea that only polarizes us all.

We need liberty. Good things will follow after that.

[ConchRepublican]

The idea of limited government makes sense on so many levels. Let the states be the testing grounds of policy. Rather than this "one size fits all" idea that only polarizes us all.

That was the original idea . . . then people who think they know whats best for everyone else started chipping away at things . . .

We need liberty. Good things will follow after that.

Truer words can't be found.

[Pahonu]

The idea of limited government makes sense on so many levels. Let the states be the testing grounds of policy. Rather than this "one size fits all" idea that only polarizes us all.

That was the original idea . . . then people who think they know whats best for everyone else started chipping away at things . . .

We need liberty. Good things will follow after that.

Truer words can't be found.

These statements are true and well meant, but then something big happens like 9/11 and people cry out for more protection and now we have the Department of Homeland Security. Or in the case of pandemic people demand access to vaccines and the Center for Disease Control is born. Or there's some food-born contagion and people demand action and now we have the Food and Drug Administration. Or people get killed on the job routinely and now we have Occupational Health and Safety Administration. It's a creeping crawl of government involvement, but would we want all those agencies gone and be vulnerable to all these things again?

I think we too often take these things for granted and believe every bit of our success was self made. One-hundred years ago a big chunk of us on this board wouldn't still be alive. The average life expectancy in 1910 was about 50 years old and much of that was due to occupational hazzards, food-born illness and pandemic amongst many others. How much freedom can you enjoy when your dead? It's one thing to cry out for less government, but which of those do you want to eliminate?

[Majordomo]

Ron Paul's End the Fed is a great read and gives a lot of perspective on how the Federal Reserve has seriously messed up our country. Creating money out of thin air, resulting in inflation, is essentially a tax on every one of us. Not just "the rich" and not just "the poor." Everyone. It makes "fatcat" bankers even "fatter" and hurts middle income folks like you and me.

I read this book as well and I cannot believe how informative it was. It can be read in a day, but what you glean from it will stay with you forever.

Freedom and liberty is the bottom line. Most politicians will try to use it as a catch phrase or will simply not use it all because freedom and liberty would actually work against their goals, but Ron Paul lives and breathes it and goes out of his way to teach what it means.

[Jake]

I'm not taking a personal shot here, but it is overly simplistic to say that because the stimulus didn't keep unemployment below 8% as predicted that "it was a total failure" to use your words. The majority of economists have stated it has been successful, creating between 1.2 and 2.8 million jobs. Unemployment would have been 1% to 1.5% higher according to the Congressional Budget Office http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967 . I would add that the CBO is the closest thing to a non-partisan group you will find anywhere near Washington.

It was the administration who made promises that the stimulus package would keep unemployment below 8%. After $800 billion and a boatload of promises the economy is weak at best, and the unemployment rate blew past 8% and kept right on going. Your right about one thing, the CBO is typically fair in their scoring; however they are at the mercy of the data/assumptions given to them to run the models, and both parties play games with the numbers so even CBO scores don’t always reflect reality. The amount of jobs created by the stimulus spending is a highly debated topic, primarily because the administration used some really shady assumptions to come up with a magical number of “jobs saved” which is added to the total. Furthermore many of the “jobs created” were temporary – things like the census workers, research grants, and adding road crews for extra projects do not create permanent jobs. The biggest beneficiary of the stimulus were people in public sector union jobs, which given the ties the unions have to Obama the whole thing reeked of political favoritism. So the 1.2-2.8 million jobs “created” is not a solid figure, but even if you take the average and say the stimulus created 2 million jobs that means that the price tag for each job is a whopping $400,000! I will stick with my assessment that the stimulus was a failure, a big steaming pile of failure! And I strongly disagree with your statement that the that the majority of economists claim otherwise. Now we have the current proposed stimulus-2 (“jobs bill”) which is another $447 billion travesty, no thanks.

The spending is out of control. The Bush administration raised the national debt $4.9 trillion (from $5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion) during their 8 years in office, which is horrendous. But Obama has made that seem like childs play. He rolled into town and immediately expanded the federal budget by a trillion dollars, dished out $800 billion in stimulus, rammed thru Obamacare (with a down payment of $634 billion and more to come) and kept right on rolling. Keep in mind that the price tag of the first stimulus package alone had the cost of the entire Iraq war beat by a 100 billion dollars (CBO scores cost of Iraq war at $709 billion thru 2010). In only 2.5 years Obama has managed to tack on another $4.2 trillion to the national debt and the hits just keep coming, debt and deficit projections are simply staggering. Serious financial reform is needed - cut spending, reform the entitlement programs, and rework the tax system ASAP or we will be in a major world of hurt very soon.

Although it may sound it to you that I am hard right person, I am not. Common sense is all that is needed to see how screwed up things are and I am very frustrated with the current path this country is on and how the current administration is governing. You seem to be a fan of the tax and spend policies, and I doubt I will ever be able to convince you otherwise (nor will you change my mind either), so let’s just leave it at we agree to disagree. But I know down deep that you know that you are wrong and I am right….LOL! Or maybe I should end with the classic……I’m rubber and your glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!