BF2S Forums Double-dip recession imminent

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

You make valid points but many deductions are designed to keep the money working for and in the economy. Making Investments a deduction creates a big source of cash for start up companies ventures and capitalism in general. Taxing them would empty that same pool. The capital gains tax is an example. It lessens your incentive to take risks so that money ( not invested ) will not stimulate the economy. Will the government subsidize me if my investment fails ? If not why should they feel entitled to such a big share if my efforts succeed. The money that got me a Tax deduction was put back into the economy and that should be their primary concern in my opinion. They are losing site of the very purpose of the Deductions original design. They just see " More Money " . Its short sighted.

Well, business deductions for corporate taxation make sense.

Deductions regarding personal taxation don't as much.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

What about my case in particular ? NYC lost my money and local contractors are now being contacted ( in my county ) to build a garage/apt and swimming pool*. It wouldn't have happened if they hadn't gouged me with property taxes.

NYC raised taxes and lost money. They drove the money elsewhere. I would have held on to that place forever. It was my whole plan. NYC is an Island that isn't getting any bigger. That property value would only go up. But they are letting NYC slip again. I cant afford to sit through an economic down turn waiting for NYC to get desperate enough to elect another Conservative to make it habitable for Tax payers.

. . .  Good Bye City life ! Green Acres we are theeeeeeeeeeeeere !

* thanks in part to DilbertX and his contemporaries.

Well, I'm referring to federal taxes, not local or state ones.

What each state or city is best off doing is dependent on the situation and area.  As far as I can tell, NYC really does charge too much in taxes.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

It works the same way. People see Tax as punitive and try to avoid it, Its human nature to take the easiest route. The Yacht Tax is a perfect example. look it up.

Yes, but there is a limit to how far you can decrease taxes just as there is a limit to how far you can increase them.

Currently, we're on the low end of federal taxation on a personal level.  We're closer to the high end for corporate taxation.

What I'm suggesting is that we adapt our percentages to mimic the rest of the First World for the most part.  We've tried both really high taxes before the Reagan era and really low ones afterwards, but there seems to be a happy medium that countries like Canada have managed to find.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

That depends...  If you tax them just below the rate that most other countries tax them, then they have no incentive to move.  Currently, there is a significant gap between our highest personal tax rates and those of most other countries.

True but when you're a millionaire you can pretty much do what the hell you want (island owners,private planes and all) so a country that offers the lowest fiscal policy is always going to be the most attractive.

Well, not necessarily.  Third World countries have the lowest taxes usually.

Tax havens will always be an issue (like the Cayman Islands), but aside from that, taxes can only go so low before your social systems collapse.

America is on the low end of personal taxation while moving towards the high end of spending.  This has to be reconciled soon, and taxes are part of that.

Someone watched Capitalism: A love story and actually believed it...

How sad. I tried watching it today and it was such a worthless pile of lies and sob stories that I couldn't get more than halfway through it.

I hope imminent isnt a fiscal quarter

JohnG@lt wrote:

How could you possibly think it was any good? It was over the top "Free Land" Bolshevik propaganda. Ohnoes, people getting foreclosed on. Wtf? The bank was supposed to eat the cost and let them live in their home for free indefinitely? The bank is a charity? Ohnoes, blame the corporations and Reagan for factories shutting down instead of the union labor for making them non-competitive in a global market. Just about the only thing he said that wasn't a lie or purposely misleading was when he pointed out that American prosperity, and manufacturing in particular, was based on having zero competition in the post WWII market.

Well, for starters, I've seen every Moore film with the exception of Roger & Me.  I'm familiar enough with his material to realize he's a satirist, not a documentarian.  I know he likes to pretend to be that role, but I think any avid film fan like myself should be able to make that distinction just from perception and experience.

So, I did find it somewhat informative and entertaining.  I certainly wouldn't take it as gospel, but I'm not dismissing all of it either.  That's how Moore's work is.  You cross-reference what he throws at you, and you'll generally find a lot of half-truths.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

How could you possibly think it was any good? It was over the top "Free Land" Bolshevik propaganda. Ohnoes, people getting foreclosed on. Wtf? The bank was supposed to eat the cost and let them live in their home for free indefinitely? The bank is a charity? Ohnoes, blame the corporations and Reagan for factories shutting down instead of the union labor for making them non-competitive in a global market. Just about the only thing he said that wasn't a lie or purposely misleading was when he pointed out that American prosperity, and manufacturing in particular, was based on having zero competition in the post WWII market.

Well, for starters, I've seen every Moore film with the exception of Roger & Me.  I'm familiar enough with his material to realize he's a satirist, not a documentarian.  I know he likes to pretend to be that role, but I think any avid film fan like myself should be able to make that distinction just from perception and experience.

So, I did find it somewhat informative and entertaining.  I certainly wouldn't take it as gospel, but I'm not dismissing all of it either.  That's how Moore's work is.  You cross-reference what he throws at you, and you'll generally find a lot of half-truths.

I've seen all of his previous films (including Roger & Me) and even read a few of his books, but this one was just over the top bad. I didn't find it entertaining and there are a lot of stupid people in this country that actually believe what he says. It's also very difficult to take anything said by a 400 lb multi-millionaire, complaining about other wealthy people, seriously...

I think Fahrenheit 9/11 was his weakest film and was more guilty of over-the-top theatrics than this one.

Granted, if you want to see a really good documentary on credit and the insanity of big lenders...  "Maxed Out" is the film to see...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxed_Out

while they're at it they should repeal the 13th amendment.  Just imagine all the cheap labor.

Harmor wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

while they're at it they should repeal the 13th amendment.  Just imagine all the cheap labor.

Its effectively abolished it in China where we buy all our crappy products from.

slavery in china?  not really.  there are countries eager to do the same work for even less.  Why do you think they keep their currency worthless?

But cynicism aside I assume you disagree on all points as none of them you think would improve our country?

none of those suggestions will improve our economy or country.  you say companies would go on a hiring spree if there were no CIT.  why would companies hire people when the demand for products and services doesn't exist?  the only other entity that can create enough jobs to alter the economy is the federal government.  but, of course,  that's just wasteful spending and socialism so you come up with suggestions like eliminating the CIT because obviously companies would rather hire superfluous employees than bank a big quarter to boost its security valuation and bonus checks.  all this economic instant gratification is what got us into this mess in the first place.  most of those jobs sustained by the housing bubble are gone, and many of them aren't coming back.  there is no quick fix when millions of jobs evaporate.

it's not pessimism or cynicism, just the reality no politician can acknowledge.

Last edited by Reciprocity (2010-10-02 01:14:54)

Harmor wrote:

Here are some ways to avert another recesson and get us out of this sluggish economy:

1. Make the Bush tax cuts permanent for all Americans.

Cutting spending matters more.

Harmor wrote:

2. Repeal the Obamacare

I can agree with that.

Harmor wrote:

3. Repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

It doesn't do anything.  Why would repealing it help?

Harmor wrote:

4. Abolish the corporate income tax.

Terrible idea...  We're having enough trouble with obtaining tax revenue as it is.  Lowering the corporate tax down to the OECD average would be good, however.

Harmor wrote:

5. Ban collective bargaining in the public sector.

I can agree with that.

Harmor wrote:

6. Repeal the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

Terrible idea as well.  Competing with China isn't the issue.  Competing with other First World countries is.

Harmor wrote:

7. Repeal the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Hell no...  This is one of the few stabilizing regulations we have in finance.

Harmor wrote:

8. Repeal the Williams Act of 1968

Stockholders should have a right to know what the companies they invest in are doing.

Harmor wrote:

9. Repeal the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890)

Dude, what are you smoking?

Harmor wrote:

10. Repeal the Tariff Act of 1930 (Smoot-Hawley) and its amendments.

Is that even still in effect anymore?

Harmor wrote:

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/10/ … -recovery/

#4 is pretty interesting.  Definiately would make our companies competitive in the world and bring jobs here.  But the perception that it'll be a tax cut for the wealthy would make this unpopular until all the companies start highering like crazy and bringing jobs back into the United States.

The general problem, again, is that you're assuming we need to compete with China.  We don't.  We need to compete with Canada, Australia, and Europe.  We need more skilled jobs, not the low skill manufacturing ones that make up the majority of the jobs we lose to outsourcing.

my granpda just bought my mom and i a new apartment and he took out a mortgage so he can evade taxes lelz. tax laws need to be fixed.

looks like its here

Harmor wrote:

Here are some ways to avert another recesson and get us out of this sluggish economy:

1. Make the Bush tax cuts permanent for all Americans. 

2. Repeal the Obamacare

3. Repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

4. Abolish the corporate income tax.

5. Ban collective bargaining in the public sector.

6. Repeal the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

7. Repeal the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

8. Repeal the Williams Act of 1968

9. Repeal the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890)

10. Repeal the Tariff Act of 1930 (Smoot-Hawley) and its amendments.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/10/ … -recovery/

#4 is pretty interesting.  Definiately would make our companies competitive in the world and bring jobs here.  But the perception that it'll be a tax cut for the wealthy would make this unpopular until all the companies start highering like crazy and bringing jobs back into the United States.

Removing all the controls would make the next recession ten times worse, anyway, LOL Fox News.

Just picking one, Sarbanes Oxley, companies being forced to report honestly is un-American dammit!

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-10-14 17:44:35)