Rod, you’ve brought back memories. The Marines Corp Recruiter had every right to put you in the Marines rather than the Army. Draftees do not get to choose. You’re lucky he was so nice about it.
With few exceptions, most CEOs taking a $200M annual salary do so by improving the net worth of the company by more than the $200M they're raking in.
I agree with you that many CEO’s are worth it…HOWEVER…Besides the Hollywood types…there’s an equal group that rakes in MILLIONS and IMHO doesn’t even come close to earning it - Hedge Fund Managers. Basically they are legalized bookies. They don’t produce anything…Their role could be completely eliminated without effecting the economy one bit. How many people working for Shearson Lehman are worth the money they make??? There are far more of those people then any hollywood types making that kind of money. How much money did the idiot make from Chase that invented the Mortgage bundling system??
https://docs.google.com/present/view?skipauth=true&pli=1&id=ddp4zq7n_0cdjsr4fn
Same…I always thought a flat tax would be simple…but at what rate ? You need a high rate to encourage reinvestment upon which you pay NO personal income tax; you need a lower rate rate so the average joe (you and me, unless you’re wealthier then I thought) can get by. With a relatively low flat rate, our economy would be stagnant and fees would be out of sight…for everything. There are pros and cons of a flat rate…the only pro is…it’s simpler to under stand. The big con ? The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
It goes along with trickle down economics.
Btw, the highest tax rate 50 years ago was 91%, is now 35%. The result has the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer and a dramatic need for more, not fewer social programs. So, we are getting your wish and I maintain it isn’t working. To maintain the current income level and keep CSAs military well funded, you need a flat rate of between 17and 20 %. There are millions of low wage earners who pay little or no fed only taxes, but still pay local, sales, FICA and medicare, who would be driven deeper into poverty, putting a greater burden on the welfare system. Or, we just let them die and become Soylent green .
Mike, you present an excellent argument. So excellent that I have no answer for it. Perhaps if the Glass-Steagall act were returned to its 1933 stature?
Like I said, I think the big issue is the distribution of wealth which has become alarmingly concentrated at the top at something like 40% of all wealth owned by 5% of the people. This is heading toward where Europe was way back in the 1920’s, and not a good thing. There are a number of factors why including moving plants to China, Ivy league revolving doors, anti-union/labor movements, anti-public school movements, tax policies, etc. that have flattened wealth and earnings at the lower levels. I think this is more of an issue than the unemployment rate. If you are born into a family worth 20-30 million, the odd are pretty high that you also will generate substantial wealth. Conversely you can still be born into a poor family and do well but it is getting harder and harder in comparison. If the club requires a degree from the Ivy League at $60K a year, its hard for a poor family to compete with that. Just thoughts of concern is all.
I’m not convinced that inequitable distribution of wealth is the problem nor that redistribution of wealth is the answer. The occasional anomolie aside, wealth used to be created by creating, producing, and building, as I described in my earlier post. But Mike brought up such an excellent point that I have to amend my earliier post. Much wealth, TOO much wealth, is created by creating and producing NOTHING! Financial wizards have created instruments to take money from the system for things that don’t even exist. This removes enormous amounts of money from the overall system, diverting it from the productive enterprises that it used to go to. Derivatives are the very definition of a tool to make huge amouunts of cash from selling things that don’t even exist to people who don’t understand what they’re buying. Derivatives are made so complicated that nobody understands them.
I believe the real reason we’re in trouble is multifold.
The seed was planted with the Communuity Reinvestment Act of 1977. It required lending institutions to come up with creative ways of giving home mortgages to people who could not afford them by conventional means. The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act of 1999 then essentially repealed the Glass-Steagal Act of 1933, which was enacted to keep lenders from investing in highly leveraged, high-risk vehicles. Those two actions combined created fertile ground for no-doc loans, low-doc loans, loans outside intelligent guidelines, ARMs, and other “bad paper”.
During the '70s, the last large wave of baby boomers also was reaching prime home buying age. Interest rates, inflation rates, and unemployment rates diring the latter '70s also reached double digits, preventing those boomers from buying and creating pent up demand.
So, we had huge pent up demand, sudden availability for ANYONE to buy a home using highly creative financing and extreme leveraging, and a sudden drop in '81 to single digit interest rates, inflation rates, and unemployment rates. A huge wave of buyers came through the housing market and sucked the prices to an enormously inflated level. Everyone who could swing a hammer became a builder, all financed by banks who were looking for ways to give them money. Then, after the wave went through, there was nobody to buy all those half-built, highly leveraged new homes at their overly inflated prices.
Home sales tanked. Buidlers went bankrupt. Banks closed. Housing prices sank. People found themselves “upside down” and walked away from their mortgages. Forclosures skyrocketed. Then, with the lending institutions atrapped for money and new freedom to do invest in high risk vehicles, the geniuuses began bundling highly leveraged mortgages and eventually developed derivatives. Loans to buy things that don;t exist. Loans backed by nothing.
I believe we’re blaming the wrong people by pointing the fingers at the wealthy. The ones we should be pointing th fingers at are the feds. Their meddling in the market in the seventys with the CRA led us down the path to disaster. The Act sounded like it would enable peole who could not afford to buy houses to buy houses anyway. Its effects were disasterous. If the feds had allowed the freemarket forces to control the market, I don;t believe we’d be in this mess.
And, now, I turn my soapbox over to others to debate my theory.
Same… I don’t believe I or anyone else is" blameing" the wealthy, especially those who own businesses. I was just pointing out that there are good reasons for a graduated income tax. And, like all taxes, they do influence people’s behavior and investment schemes. Right now, the business model is sought as a plan for governance by some of the most wealthy in this land. The problem is, good government is a trust, not a business. You measure good governance by the well being of the population at large, NOT by the profit of the most wealthy. They can go hand in hand if done welll, but not at the excusion of anyone. That’s where good govt. comes in. Govt. provides the infrastructure for all business ventures. They have a responsibility to insure that it’s not misused.
Respectfully, Dag, I believe that rather than provide the infrastructure for all business ventures the government’s only role should be to protect those with whom the businesses conduct their affairs from being preyed upon dishonestly. Businesses existed for thousands of years before government began actively “managing” them" for the greater good". They existed for hundreds of years in this county alone…from before the colonies joined together. The difference is that IMHO the government did not create fertile ground for the growth of industry. The fertile ground exists, the government needs to discomtinue the practice of manipulating marketplaces for social agendas.
Does the government protect us from the dihonest? IMHO, no. Looking at the severe damage the credit rating and debt collection industries can do while being totally protected from any liability whatsoever from damage caused by their own errors, I wouls say NO. And looking at the fact that credit card companies can agree to give you credit at 1.9% and suddenly change it to 21% at will, on monety that they had agreed to lend you for 1.9%, I would say definitely NO. And then there’s home mortgages, with a 1" thick stack of fine print, much of which is to meet government requirements, all in legalese that nobody can understand.
IMHO the government has strayed far from its function as it relates to business and industry. It actievly meddles in marketplaces for the purposes of doing social engineering and protecting those industries that can afford to fund lobbies…and gifts and cash contributions to members of congress and to campaigns. And continues to do so.
I have nothing against the rich,however I believe in several cases if you care to go back far enough you will find a ruthless slave driver who didnt have any qualms about taking advantage of the people when they could(I know people like that)" some folks is just plain hogs" and some people are clueless.I’m very tired of people whose “hard work” consists of making phone calls,going to the country or nodding thier heads,etc; I guess I’m jealous of people whose job consists of spending a stipend,somehow,someway ,our prosperity must inevitibly be at the expense of someone else.The chickens are coming home to roost ,any nation that consumes 25% of the energy produced in the world,while only having 5% of the population must be infringing on someone else.Right now there is enough to go around,everyone can probaly have a good living-but everyone cannot be rich.
If a avatar would call to task the leaders of this world and ask why children are starving with bloated bellies,whilst flies blow them and other people invest thier money in automobiles and other playthings and live in luxury.What would they tell this being?That these children are lazy and didnt work hard enough? that they are content to live in poverty? Woe to this generation,remember the Parable of "Lazarus and the Rich Man"
While a lot of folks came about it honest ,there are a lot of people circumstance smiled upon.Life isnt fair,we just as well get used to it( sort of reminds of the time,when superwiz Hillary Clinton made all of that money on livestock by her superior investing ability(chuckle)-Kevin
Its interesting that you should say that, kmccune. Andrew Carnegie was apparently a nice guy, but he wanted to be the richest man in America. So he hired a man named Frick to run his steel mills. Frick was not a nice guy and would and did do anything necessary to make his steel mills the biggest earners in the USA. His deeds went a long way to creating labor unions in the steel industry. He also built a resort just north of Johnstown, PA after damming up the river. Then he weakened the earthen dam by lowering it so that he could ride his carriage over the dam (really). A huge rain storm came up and destroyed Johnstown when the dam broke, killing thousands of residents. Carnegie was so ashamed of his part in it (he was a member of the club) that he turned to a life of philanthropy to ease the pain.
I don’t blame people like my multi-million dollar boss for the problem. He’s a brilliant hard working person. A little out of touch with the common man…but he’s earned his money by coming up with brilliant ideas…and working 80+ hours a week.
The whole idea of having lower tax rates for investment income was that people were actually investing into a company to spur the economy. That is NOT the case now…nor has it been for the past 30 years. People invest in the stock market for one thing…and one thing only…TO MAKE MONEY. There is no long term investment of companies. Instead people invest their money in money markets that will move your money around from one company to another or a bond or a hedge fund depending on market trends. On the surface this seems harmless. But the ramification of this can have devastating effects on a company the moneymarket or hedgefund invested into. Companies are now being forced to look at their next quarter’s profit instead of a long-term look that would be far more beneficial the company and it’s investors. But that hasn’t been happening in years.
@MB - Derivatives are so complicated they are sold to very sophisticated financial institutes and even they don’t have a clue what they’re buying. Doesn’t matter if it makes money or not. The company selling the derivative still makes their money. Ever see the movie Trading Places. It’s more realistic then you think. Funny movie though.
Now take a system like this and put in place someone with the morality of Satan…what do you think you have then?? And people don’t think Wall Street needs any regulation???
The Amenican dream was alway to come here, get a good job, raise a family, and maybe you will make a success of yourself and become wealthy. Now the public looks at those with money to be “evil takers from the middle class” because they made their wealth. Yet those same people wish to be wealthy too some day. It doesn’t work only one way. Everybody has that shot already.
I’ve been watching the History Channels “The men who made America” and many of those tycoons spent more than most realize on infrastructure. Bridges, railroads, pipelines, roads shipyards docks and much more. Yes it was to bring their product to the masses or to transport others goods to the people. But they paid it because that was how to get something new into the reach of the people. They did get many millions in return, but vthats why they gambled on that bridge or railroad.
Still today…in Milwaukee is the Bradly Center (sports arena) it’s named that because the Bradleys donated many millions to build it. I’m sure every one of you that read this can think of a local facility in your state too, where a wealthy person paid the brunt of the costs. Almost every park is named after a person that bought the land to donate as a park, a library, a school, etc. etc…
I too wish that a ton of money would fall into my lap. I’ve been waiting for my ship to come in all these years and finally I realized that I was waiting for my ship…at the airport.
If I were king of the world;
-
I’d order all the world to commit to “world peace” and I would select a panel to review border disputes and the other issues that seem to plague the world.
All armies would become a world army…not to control my power, but to control the abuse of power by others. No more ethnic cleansing and starvation of part of your population because they are not of your sect. -
A world court…not a puppet court would review complaints and the judgement “an eye for an eye” would be most sentencing guidelines. An official skims millions meant for food or a clinic for the poor and they would be sentenced to starvation rations and public service for many years.
Warlords would not be tolerated and would be put to death at once.
Dictators that keep all the wealth for their few minions and let the masses starve would be punished by the people that he starved. A year in prison…or stoning…it’s up to those hurt the most to seak revenge. -
I would require all nations to ante up a small percentage of the population to be inducted into a world wide “peace corps” offering aid to those nations that wish to advance in agriculture, medicine, industry or infrastructure. A short boot camp, and a service of two years for every able bodied person 18-24. Those nations that wish to remain stalled in the past…so be it…I wouldn’t make some tribe from the jungles run power lines and internet to each hut…look where it’s gotten us. Greeks might be forced to go help Turkey and they might be enlightened that the Greeks also put their pants on …one leg at a time.
-
I would order all nuclear weapons destroyed. but a small stockpile of strategic nuclear weapons would be held in reserve…only to be used to destroy any facility that may produce them in the future. This mandate today would be the one and only warning, you built them and we will as a world, would destroy them. You are a threat to the peace of the world and all loss of life in the destruction will fall on your shoulders. After their destruction, you will be held in "Contempt of the world and be punished by death.
-
If congress does not have a balanced budget signed 5 working days before it is due; All paychecks to the Administration, Senators, and House members would cease until a budget is signed. And they would work for free until it is signed. No resigning, you must work for free untill it’s passed.
none of this “if a budget isn’t passed, the soldiers and elderly checks might have to stop”!!!
that’s just a scare tactic. You didn’t hear Obama cry that “MY patcheck will stop if they don’t pass a budget” !!!
No back pay once the budget is passed, you just lost that money forever. -
I would order all bodies of government to rid the system of un-needed regulations that only make for bigger government. We all want clean air, water and safe food. A man up in northern Wisconsin got all the permits to build his retirement home. Once 90% was done they came and told him it was on a wet land and had to be moved less than 50 feet. I get so sick of reading in the paper that XYZ co. has already spent 3 million to a firm to do studies for their proposed 6 million new warehouse.
Sickening that so much goes to the bureaucracy, but the more regulations that my section has the more employee’s I get…meaning more money for my budget. -
While on government assistance (not including those with medical issues) you may not subscribe to the internet…go to the library and use their computers. You may not have cable TV…having only the “4 over the air stations” might make you desire to get a job so you CAN get cable. You may not own a car newer that 8 years old…you want a newer car…get a job. Your food stamps will buy groceries…not ready made meals…no job and you have the time to cook that chicken and bake some potatos. And your money would be on a debit card…go to McDonalds and it will not pay. You may not also own a “smart Phone”…get a dumb one like mine, all it’s for is prospective employers to call you. Get a job and you can afford the newest one with the option where it tells you what girls in the bar are ovulating.
-
Reporters of news worldwide would be free from punishment from their government for reporting fraud and injustice. BUT…they had better tell the truth to the masses, no protecting the official, no cover-ups, and all sides of an issue must be told fairly. fialure could be considered capital punishment…you have control on the minds of the masses .
-
I’d make science find a cure for ear and back hair…when a guy turns 40. My massage therapyst told me to find someone else because it takes her 20 minutes to free her hands.
-
I’d make it a punishable crime to wear spandex if you are more than 5# over weight.
Yosemite
I really like the ideas of Gerald Celente,he is very good on future trends,he seems to have a very good handle on why the country has went in the direction it has.Remember this one thing-“The people make the land great,the land doesnt make the people great”(my qoute actually).
To much wealth created with a cool hand-Kevin
Just seen your post Yosemite,most all of us do pass the Speedo stage quicker then we like.You do seem to be caught up in the " zeit geist" of this thread, thank you some good ideas,I hope others can pass on thier ideas as well-Kevin
I guess I should have made the “ear hair” #1
Yosemite
I guess my concern is with the concentration of wealth among a few not creating wealth per se. I’m not anti rich, or business, or working hard, or creativity, etc. Just like to see a level playing field is all.
In law class we were discussing real estate abstracts and the professor noted that you’ll see one guys name on a lot of the abstracts in Sioux Falls. In the 1930s when everyone was going broke (except for the likes of Citibank/National, etc.), this Sioux Falls lawyer would go to the Sheriff’s sales to pick up cheap property. At the sale he would raise his hand and ask the Sheriff about the legitimacy of a quit claim deed that every foreclosure gets. He scared the competition enough so he could buy the properties at even lower prices because no one else would bid and of course became even richer.
The story just stuck in my craw. Taking advantage of the system and others just to make more money for what? In the 70s I almost went to work for one of those Sioux Falls lawyers until he tried to cheat me out of $50 a month. Cheap sucker. I moved to Minnesota.
Conversely in the 80’s when farms were going bust in SD and MN, neighbors would get together and bid on foreclosed farms at rediculous prices so that they could turn it back to the original owners. Instead of taking advantage like the lawyer, they banded together to save the properties. Which action should be rewarded with wealth?
The Amenican dream was alway to come here, get a good job, raise a family, and maybe you will make a success of yourself and become wealthy.
I don’t think that’s true. I have no desire to get rich. I know plenty of people who have no desire of getting rich. But I do want to live comfortably and NOT have to worry about where my next meal is coming from, or how am I going to pay for my kids braces. Living comfortably is far different then being rich.
I don’t consider it EVIL to be rich. As I stated I have a lot of respect for my manager who’s a multimillionaire. He did grow up rich…he also worked very very hard in college earning his BS from Cornell and his PHD from RPI.
I do have a problem (as I stated earlier) with the Hedge fund managers many others in the financial industry who supply NOTHING to our economy. They make money for the sake of making money. No goods are produced and nothing is bartered. We can do away with that whole business and I think our country and world would be better off.
. Reporters of news worldwide would be free from punishment from their government for reporting fraud and injustice. BUT....they had better tell the truth to the masses, no protecting the official, no cover-ups, and all sides of an issue must be told fairly. fialure could be considered capital punishment...you have control on the minds of the masses .
A couple of reporters for Fox News were whistle blowers on Fox News for being told to LIE. They refused and were fired. This went all the way to the Supreme court…I think the vote was 5-4 saying that there is no law preventing a news organization to lie through their teeth to you. They can say what ever they want (as long as it’s not slanderous) without any reprisal. The firing of the two news casters were upheld.
Same…how has the government strayed when it provides ALL of the transportation and communication structure necessary for interstate commerce. And, at a huge expense to the tax payer the US Navy has taken over responsibility for keeping shipping lanes open for world wide commerce.
TheUS govt. does more then it’s share to protect businesses. Now the arguement is "maybe the Fed is interfering when it also protects the citizenry " from being taken advantage of unscrupulous practices by the corporations. Corporations have found ways to violate anti trust laws for years, all in the name of profit. You and I pay taxes to supply all of this support. It is not too much to ask for govt. to protect our interests as well. So it’s ok to protect the business from being preyed upon but not the consumer from the business, who by the way is footing the bill ?
With a resounding NO do I believe that the free market, left to it’s own can either survive without govt. intervention nor can it be expected to act in the best interest of the public. Corporations are by their nature, sociopathic in interest and action. If left to their own unregulated devices, we would return to the 19th century model where both the worker and the consumer were poorly served. Been there, done that…the govt. must grow with technology and the huge changes that will occur because of this growth.
It’s both too simple and wrong to say " let the free market determine everything " Trust me, businesses don’t want complete freedom any more then the public.
Yes Yose,No.43 would be abolishing abolishing unwanted hair(esp,ear hair)No.44 would be voting on wether to go to war(we dont need 535+1 telling 300 or so million we need to go and tear up other peoples property,let the ones who want to fight go fight).
Yep free market couldnt be trusted to self regulate-Kevin
MikeInNH…“the vote was 5-4”. Bet we could list the names of the justices that voted each way. One of the few times it becomes hard to separate “news” from " entertainment". Fox is an entertainment network…and it was very entertaining watching them explain away the results compared to their predictions in the recent elections. It was like watching Dallas or Mash final episode before it goes to rerun. These people are devoted to providing entertainment to their “low information viewers” who take them seriously as a news organization. The supreme court obviously thinks that such viewers deserve entertainment too and it’s not their responsibility to be truthful to them. Most wouldn’t recognized the truth regardless.
The same applies to “the Daily Show” with John Stewart". He freely admits that anyone who watches either he or Fox for any more then what it is, is kidding themselves. Unless of course you admit to yourself, that you are watching either Fox or Stewart or Saturday Night Live for that matter, for entertainment. Then, the supreme court has it right IMO and we are free to watch either for laughs.