OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 9:47 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 22, 9:18 am, "Eisboch" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message

...

On Mar 22, 6:21 am, "Eisboch" wrote:

The increased tax revenues? They came primarily from the other liberal
arch-enemy .... business.

and business just got it back. in spades. paid for by the middle
class.
------------------------------------

Who authorized that?

business leaders did. they flew to washington in their private jets,
and said they needed new $6000 umbrella stands because it's what
they're used to.

----------------------------------------------

Right. No argument. But, who gave them the money?

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the same people who wrote the rules that have crippled the middle
class....the best politicians money can buy...been that way for 30
years. at this point what are our options?

----------------------------------

Voting booth. But, as long as the pols promise a pot of gold in every
garage, they will be elected.

Eisboch

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Mar 22, 10:44*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...

you might tell us where a totally free market ever yielded anything
except an oligopoly like we have now where the middle class pays for
everything and the rich simply expect it as their due.

------------------------------

Wow.

It's no wonder this country is going to hell in a hand-basket.

Oh, well.

Eisboch


you're right. i forgot to credit the free market masters of the
universe on wall street

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:52:04 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
.. .

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:10:52 -0500, thunder
wrote:


This wasn't about home ownership. It was about using houses as banks.
Sucking out any equity, to pay of credit card bills. Flipping houses
expecting a 10-15% return in a year. It was a bubble, and like all
bubbles, it burst. It wasn't Clinton's fault. It wasn't Bush's fault.
It was *our* fault.

Bull****. I had nothing to do with it.

--Vic

This all started with tax reform legislation passed by Congress in 1986.
Reagan was president and the Democrats had control of congress. Up until
then individuals could deduct things like interest paid on car loans and
credit cards. The tax reform bill eventually (first year it reduced it
to 65%) did away with these deductions, so people started getting 2nd
mortgages or "home equity lines of credit" to purchase big ticket items
because the interest paid was still deductable.

It's ironic that the tax reform bill of 1986, passed despite Reagan's
opposition to it, is now under "revision" by the Obama administration.
They are proposing the equivalent of tax credits if you buy a new car in
an effort to stimulate the economy.

Eisboch


..and they call us a socialist country!
Up here, the average citizen can't deduct interest from your tax return
for interest paid on a home, or any other possession.. unless you are
showing that poperty/vehicle as a business expense.
If you have an office in your home and can show income derived from it's
use..you can deduct the fraction of your expenses based on the percentage
of square footage that office represents. As for the vehicle, you have to
estimate how much of the mileage is business related and claim expenses on
that ratio.


Pretty much the same here except interest paid on a home mortgage (prime
residence only)qualifies for a tax deduction. You can claim interest paid
for a second home mortgage or qualifying boat loan (and maybe an RV .... not
sure) only if you don't have a mortgage on your prime residence that you
are claiming a deduction for.

Car loan and credit card interest deductions were phased out.

Eisboch

I think you've got that wrong. It may be that the AMT rules require
the lack of a mortgage on your main home, but generally you can deduct
mortgage interest for both your main and second home, which may be a
boat or an RV meeting the criteria.

http://www.irs.gov/publications/p936/ar02.html
--

John H

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government
results from too much government."

Thomas Jefferson

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:13:44 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:10:52 -0500, thunder
wrote:


This wasn't about home ownership. It was about using houses as banks.
Sucking out any equity, to pay of credit card bills. Flipping houses
expecting a 10-15% return in a year. It was a bubble, and like all
bubbles, it burst. It wasn't Clinton's fault. It wasn't Bush's fault.
It was *our* fault.

Bull****. I had nothing to do with it.

--Vic

This all started with tax reform legislation passed by Congress in 1986.
Reagan was president and the Democrats had control of congress. Up until
then individuals could deduct things like interest paid on car loans and
credit cards. The tax reform bill eventually (first year it reduced it
to 65%) did away with these deductions, so people started getting 2nd
mortgages or "home equity lines of credit" to purchase big ticket items
because the interest paid was still deductable.

It's ironic that the tax reform bill of 1986, passed despite Reagan's
opposition to it, is now under "revision" by the Obama administration.
They are proposing the equivalent of tax credits if you buy a new car in
an effort to stimulate the economy.

Eisboch


..and they call us a socialist country!
Up here, the average citizen can't deduct interest from your tax return for
interest paid on a home, or any other possession.. unless you are showing
that poperty/vehicle as a business expense.
If you have an office in your home and can show income derived from it's
use..you can deduct the fraction of your expenses based on the percentage of
square footage that office represents. As for the vehicle, you have to
estimate how much of the mileage is business related and claim expenses on
that ratio.


The more socialist, the higher the tax requirement and the fewer the
deductions. I'm sure the liberals here would like to do away with the
mortgage interest deduction and spend the money on bigger government.
--

John H

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government
results from too much government."

Thomas Jefferson

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:44:52 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:



I don't disagree with anything you said except it has nothing to do with the
subject, ie. the "rich" getting richer by taking from the middle class.

We're not connecting here. What I said directly relates to the
widening gap between the "rich" and "middle class."
The offshoring of jobs and science is directly related to Wall
Street's (and the corps that trade there) pushing cost cutting to pump
share value. With no thought to government indebtedness due to
balance of trade deficits, or consumer debt, or the future strength of
America.
The winners are the "rich" and the losers are the "middle class."
You may not call that one taking from the other, but that's the end
result. And widely published wealth statistics bear that out.
I don't buy into "political" arguments when non-disputed facts are
available.

The goal of accumulating personal wealth to whatever degree is not bad as
long as it's done legally and without being at the expense of others. This
country was founded on the concept of free markets, competition and minimal
government intervention. The Constitution is written around these concepts.
It worked well for many years producing the strongest economic nation on
earth with a relatively good standard of living for most. Ellis Island and
other immigration locations have records of millions of people who left
their homelands to pursue opportunities here. Still going on.

All fine and dandy except when one examines "at the expense of
others." That "expense" is what's under discussion.

What screws it up is greed in big business (often in response to stockholder
expectations, BTW) and intervention by an increasingly corrupt government,
residing mainly in Congress. There's a role for government to play ....
making sure the playing field is fair by regulations and/or actions to
enforce laws. But when the government officials are as greedy as the big
businesses, all bets are off.


Yep.

Some people just don't like the truth. The problems we have now originated
in lending practices that should never have been put in place. Government
did that. Banks and Wall Street tried to take advantage of it.

It began with 401k money distorting the true value of share prices and
enabling corruption, because "Now everybody can be rich!"
The real impetus for the bad loans came from Wall Street's need to
pump up more "wealth creation" with mortgage derivatives.
Wall Street has been running the government for decades now.
Still is with Geithner. You'll see many revelations about Goldman
Sachs in the near future. The reason Geithner can't get Treasury
assistants is that all of Wall Street is dirty with ill-gained wealth.
Every joker he wants to hire is worth $50-100 million with multiple
houses around the world. Real money. While the rest of the country
is under water. Nobody can pass the smell test, just as he didn't.
I don't see anybody here arguing against American free enterprise.
But we haven't had that in years.
Because we haven't had leaders who understood that Wall Street values
and America's values can't co-exist for long.
Basically we've had a Wall Street politburo directing government
actions to coincide with global financial "values."
We need a revolution to get back to American values.
Those make us stronger, not deeper in debt.

--Vic

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:52:04 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


Pretty much the same here except interest paid on a home mortgage (prime
residence only)qualifies for a tax deduction. You can claim interest paid
for a second home mortgage or qualifying boat loan (and maybe an RV ....
not
sure) only if you don't have a mortgage on your prime residence that you
are claiming a deduction for.

Car loan and credit card interest deductions were phased out.

Eisboch


I think you've got that wrong. It may be that the AMT rules require
the lack of a mortgage on your main home, but generally you can deduct
mortgage interest for both your main and second home, which may be a
boat or an RV meeting the criteria.

http://www.irs.gov/publications/p936/ar02.html
--


Your right. I must have been thinking about claiming the Homestead thing
or something.
You can deduct interest paid on a first and second house, or a first house
and boat or RV if they have the required sleeping quarters and living
basics.

http://www.excelcredit.com/tax_deductible.htm

Eisboch

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"John H" wrote in message
...

The more socialist, the higher the tax requirement and the fewer the
deductions. I'm sure the liberals here would like to do away with the
mortgage interest deduction and spend the money on bigger government.
--

John H



Or maybe health care and drug programs for your declining years.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message

bush was president for about 2800 days.

obama's been president for 60.

even you should be able to do the math.

republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.

bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price

Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.

gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.

He

was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom

that's called the 'economy'. it happens.

Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.

iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.

and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.

What are
your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-

keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.

**************

The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
...

You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where central
planning and tight government control has brought the kind of prosperity
that the USA has seen to this point. All I am looking for is the name of
the country that is socialist or communist that has a higher standard of
living than the USA.


Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your two BMWs
and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less than $70K
per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.


Richard did not come from wealth from what I read. He worked hard, took
chances and scored. Took a lot of years. I worked and paid my way through
university. Took 10 years. I worked overtime, bought a business that my
buddy and I ran that for years while still keeping our other jobs. I am
comfortable, maybe not as comfortable as Eisboch, but he worked hard. You,
on the other hand, were a 40 hour a week if that Crown Employee. Did not
gamble a lot of your money and assets on running a business or growing a
business. Did not work 60-80 hours a week working. My nephew, works a
couple days a week, did not finish college, and complains of no money. No
work ethic. A major problem in the poor in this country. Why work hard
when society will give you the equivalent of about $18k a year, including
medical. And you can work side jobs for cash. Why we have 4 and 5
generation welfare families. An about 60% high school drop out rate in
areas of the country. Lots of families live on less than $50k a year. But
they do not buy expensive cars, or even new economy cars. They live in 1100
' sq houses, and not McMansions. They live within their means. Too many
want the life style of the rich and famous without the work required. Some
are there because of circumstances. A bad illness in the family, etc. But
those are a minority. Most are there because of a bad work ethic. Even the
lower IQ people hold a lot of decent paying jobs. They can not be an
electrical engineer, but they can clerk at a department store, take money at
the 7/11, etc. Why do we see so many immigrants running grocery stores,
donut shops, nail salons, and other hard, time consuming business endevors.
Because they have a work ethic. Plus they do not overspend. Live within
their means. You leased a truck 3 years ago. Now bought a Rav4. How much
a year has those vehicles cost you? I just bought a new Vensa for the wife.
Nice car by the way. $38k sticker. Replacing a 1996 car with 145k miles.
What is my cost of vehicles per year?

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
...

You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where central
planning and tight government control has brought the kind of prosperity
that the USA has seen to this point. All I am looking for is the name of
the country that is socialist or communist that has a higher standard of
living than the USA.


Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your two
BMWs and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less than
$70K per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.


Richard did not come from wealth from what I read. He worked hard, took
chances and scored. Took a lot of years. I worked and paid my way
through university. Took 10 years. I worked overtime, bought a business
that my buddy and I ran that for years while still keeping our other jobs.
I am comfortable, maybe not as comfortable as Eisboch, but he worked hard.
You, on the other hand, were a 40 hour a week if that Crown Employee. Did
not gamble a lot of your money and assets on running a business or growing
a business. Did not work 60-80 hours a week working. My nephew, works a
couple days a week, did not finish college, and complains of no money. No
work ethic. A major problem in the poor in this country. Why work hard
when society will give you the equivalent of about $18k a year, including
medical. And you can work side jobs for cash. Why we have 4 and 5
generation welfare families. An about 60% high school drop out rate in
areas of the country. Lots of families live on less than $50k a year.
But they do not buy expensive cars, or even new economy cars. They live
in 1100 ' sq houses, and not McMansions. They live within their means.
Too many want the life style of the rich and famous without the work
required. Some are there because of circumstances. A bad illness in the
family, etc. But those are a minority. Most are there because of a bad
work ethic. Even the lower IQ people hold a lot of decent paying jobs.
They can not be an electrical engineer, but they can clerk at a department
store, take money at the 7/11, etc. Why do we see so many immigrants
running grocery stores, donut shops, nail salons, and other hard, time
consuming business endevors. Because they have a work ethic. Plus they do
not overspend. Live within their means. You leased a truck 3 years ago.
Now bought a Rav4. How much a year has those vehicles cost you? I just
bought a new Vensa for the wife. Nice car by the way. $38k sticker.
Replacing a 1996 car with 145k miles. What is my cost of vehicles per
year?

Drinking again Kalif Swill??
I was replying to..and referring to *BAR* with my comments.