In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:51:52 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 3:56 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 00:59:52 -0400, wrote:

and yet the whole program of the right is to continue to deregulate
this ponzi scheme to transfer MORE money to the least productive
members of our society.

You mean the left, leftie fleabag Obama is signing the checks...willingly.

guess the right wing lying sack of **** doesnt know the GOP authored
the deregulation of wall street

and that they fight reregulation even today. that's why he has to
issue a bald faced lie about the black president

You keep changing your story.. you really don't have a leg to stand on
do you?

--
Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life!

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 13/06/2011 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:43:03 -0400, wrote:

then why have the richest 1% gotten so much bigger?

Because government tax policies and import policies made it a lot more
profitable to make things offshore and import them.
That started in the 90s (GHW Bush/Clinton)
Then you had the Clinton era deregulation that made the idea of money
making money more attractive than actually making anything.
Most of that Clinton era business boom was just an illusion (fraud,
phony profits and irrational exuberance in the stock market) and the
GW Bush boom was all based on borrowing money that didn't exist.

The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK


Reply:
Actually Ron Paul was the only one to call several economic disasters
correctly of all the Pols. He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also. He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC. His first 2 years were a spending orgy. Newt
seems to be the only one who is concerned about overspending.

On 14/06/2011 4:50 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:10:16 -0600,
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 3:53 AM, wf3h wrote:

Just know how screwed up it left Canada and Obamacare is just a huge tax
grab. Dumbsh1t Obama doesn't seem to get it.

and medical care in the US is free, right? we spend less of a
proportion of our GDP on medical care than canada, right? our
healthcare is cheaper and more affordable than canada's right?

Nothing is free. That is a fleabag fantasy. The question is who and
how it is paid for.

and yet you think american healthcare is free.

Never said it was. But you can change providers if one isn't servicing
your needs. The results are much higher service levels than you see in
Canada. You have more MRIs, you get surgery faster...less likely to die
waiting.

Hell, even our premiers in charge of health care prefer the USA. While
it is nationalized, it is rationed, basic and long waits.

let's see. 1 guy goes here for healthcare

He has money. But the point being he thought Florida would do him better.

meanwhile milions dont have it in the US.

For many it is about priorities.

guess he doesnt know that.

I do. I lived in a rental, neighbors told us their experience. Skipped
HC for decades, going to Greece, Italy, Spain, China...every year some
place new. Then he needed a bypass and they had to sell the house.
They had the money.

Don't get me wrong, I am not against universal health care. I just have
a huge gripe on how it is implemented and run. Ends up being a greedy
government tax grab if your not careful. And rationing sets in even
though they don't talk about it. Even preferences, politicians first,
then workers, the old folks get idle time.

Here is an example:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/06/08...stem-zwozdesky

Just don't go for the Obama knee jerk tax grab and engineer the system
including abuses by crooks including governemnt.

oh. it's not. it's about twice as expensive

Yep, an no line ups and the best care. We have no choice, government
took it away from in hyper-taxation.

HAHAHAHA the best care?

proof?

Lots. If health care is so great in Canada, why would a premier got to
Florida? What better proof of that do you need.

well...none. none at all. life expectancy is higher in many countries
like japan with socialized medicine

but he has his fantasies

and line? uh...how long do you wait in the US if you have no
insurance?

No clue, I always was with aid up insurance. But agree here, if
cocaine, heroin and/or booze is more important than your family, why
waste resources on you?

For Canada, health care tuned out to be a government tax grab.

and yet it works

Marginally. But the coverage is crap. Most people purchase additional
coverage anyways. You have to, $2600/year in my case. Just to make up
for what government does not cover. Like travel abroad. Private room
so I don't share with 12 others.

in the US it's an insurance grab. govt medcial care is better AND
cheaper than the free market

Doubt it. Just fleabagger bull****. Remember, I lived there for 10
years and used the system twice for myself. Busted rib and a case of
fly fishing elbow, bursitis (sp?). Know of others, work buddy. US is
consistently faster and in most cases better.

The amount of leftie media propaganda and BS. Might want to call the
Obama the Pied Piper of perals blind geed making people march to the
tax-slaughter house.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On 14/06/2011 7:17 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:00:36 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In ,
says...


The employer is not going to be taxed but I bet those people taking
their 401k money out in the future will get their ass kicked on it.


Tax-sheltered retirement income is taxed as ordinary income when
distributed.
Always was, is, always will be.
It's expected that your income will be less when you retire.
You might be able to use Roth IRA's to some extent if you think working
vs. retirement yaxes will flip on you.
Normally it doesn't work that way.
Basically you've said if you're outside when it rains you'll get wet.

I think they are going to try to discourage people from cashing out
their 401ks to try to save the stock market. That usually happens in
the tax code.

I highly doubt that would fly.
As I've said, 401k's have always been sold as taxable as ordinary
income. Changing those rules would **** people off more than Ryan's
Medicare destruction plan.

There is a big problem coming when 83 million boomers do start pulling
that much money out of the market and there is not the excess income
coming along behind them to replace it. It is just another example of
the demographic problem that is going to threaten our whole pension
model. The only one we are really acknowledging is SS but all of the
pay as you go programs are threatened the same way.

I think you overstate the entire boomer deal.
I've seen there were only 76 million boomers ever born.
They span 16-18 years, so don't hit entitlements at once.
Many are already dead and never hit entitlements.
As some come into entitlements, others go to St. Peter.
Boomer life expectancy is about 69 years.
So the idea that they all live into their 80's and 90's is a myth.
As far as pulling money out of Wall Street, some.
But a lot will still be there when they kick off.
Hardly anybody with savings dies broke.
Tax policy is far more likely to hit inheritors and so keep equities
uncashed.


Right now a worker would be paying a very minimal tax on this money
but I bet those numbers will go up sharply as we try to dig our way
out of crushing debt.

Depends on income, but you have a point there.
Low income workers could lose by saving.
Here's the bright side.
Low income worker don't have any ****ing money to save.



These days the closest thing to a pension people have is the 401k

Stop right there. The closest thing MOST people have to a pension in
the the U.S. is SS. You still don't understand that.
I don't have figures, but a wild guess is less than half of current
workers even have money in a 401k, and far fewer significant money.
100% of them have SS, with some special exceptions.

and
if your employer will match, you should save all he matches.
I would not be shocked to see legislation that requires a certain
level of 401k savings ... for the same reason mentioned above, to
replace some of that boomer money that is coming out of the equities.

I would be shocked at forced 401k contributions.
Wouldn't be shocked by the revolution that follows.
What you're saying is the government would force worker taxation be
paid directly to Wall Strett fat cats.
In your dreams.

But add in government bamboozled and skimmed SS over the years....not a
pretty picture. Government borrows it into general spend at 1%,
inflation conservative at 3%, that is a year over year 2% reduction in
vlaue with the money sitting in SS. And over the years, that adds up
big time as a shortfall to the beneficiary.

Pensions not in your name and personal account are usually a big scam,
government included.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On 14/06/2011 5:06 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:56:25 -0600,
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 9:25 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 05:57:58 -0400, wrote:

You already heard what I think about capital gains taxes. It should
reward long term (several years) investment and very short term
investments (flash trading) should actually be taxed higher than
ordinary income.

That already happens.

And big huge tax increases coming after 2012 already on the books. If
you have long term gains, you may want to realize them early just to
avoid the 20% tax rate hike coming.


more pipe dreams

tax increases? where?

oh. none.

we NEED more taxes, especially on the rich, but americans will never
let the rich be taxed.

Government is trying to end the depression with bu11sh1t. They generate
4.5% inflation, GDP grows by 2.25% and they say the depression has
ended. Only with fleabagger math, as inflation adjusted the economy
still shrank. And in shrink, it also generated less government revenue.
A real vicious economic cycle caused by government debtors denial and
mindless statism.

4.5% inflation?

where? ppi index went up 0.2% last month

Don't believe the government numbers. Find a government CPI and check
out cars, homes, gold, silver even flour say from 1914. You will find
CPI is bogus. Keeps unions happy to BS them down. Ponzi number, make
you think a 2.5% raise is good if they tell you inflation s 2%.

OK, radios are cheaper.

CPI is just BS.

and the teabaggers think we have to cut taxes on the rich because
their income only went up 500% in the last 30 years.

and federal taxes are at a 40 year low

but the right knows none of this

Tax reciepts are but not net tax load. Because over 20% are unemployed
and company are not making money like they used too. No profit, no/low
wages means less taxes.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On 14/06/2011 5:08 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:36:00 -0600,
wrote:


You cannot create wealth with debt.

sure you can. businesses do it every day. they borrow and invest.

DUH...the right wing moron doesnt even know basic economics


Same problem exists today. Far too many on the consumption side and not
enough on the producting wealth side of the fence. This is causing the
economic breakdown as no value o the producers to continue losing welth
to a failing empire of government and consumption greed.

HAHAHAHA far too many on the consumption side??

ROFLMAO!!! the problem is NOT ENOUGH consumption!

he's SUCH a moron and he's right wing!

And can't have consumption if your credit is bouncing and your working
for less. That is why Reagonomics worked and Obamanomics screwed up.
Reagan left the month 100% efficiently in the peoples pockets. Obama,
he redistributes it to big corps, banks corruption and fleabaggers on
welfare.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On 14/06/2011 5:10 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:17:35 -0600,
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 4:07 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:48:46 -0600,
wrote:
and why the right wants to destroy it. the right is an elitist,
property based ideology that hates the middle class

Screw unions, they are just the other side of the greed coin.


really? then why do countries that have strong unions have strong
manufacturing?

You mean like Japan? Lets examine that.

Unions in Japan DEMAND loyalty or management will not run you off, the
unions will. Unions are also responsible in helping management make a
modest, sustainable profit, and to address employee issues. Hell, they
are more like a HR department than a union.

CEOs are expected to resign when they lay off people for issues not
involving the laid off persons performance. And very rare to see a CEO
get paid more than 10 times the lowest wage they pay.

Strikes rare too. As government will step in and tell the unions to get
back to work or quit if demands are not reasonable for the type of work.

You do know socialist worker unions started the Nazi movement right?

uh...no they didnt. you lying sack of **** nazi lover. since when did
you start loving hitler?

Look it up, they did.


--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:49:48 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:01:26 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:
But Obama 2008, was too stupid to realize Reagan was right, government
isn't the solution, government is the problem.

HAHAHAHAHA let's see...we deregulated the banks

how'd that work out??

Greg has filled your stories full of holes on this one several times..
Give it up...


and proof of that is

you've said it.

uh huh. hell, rush lies a million times a day and is well paid.

and you aint no rush

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:50:19 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:51:52 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 3:56 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 00:59:52 -0400, wrote:

and yet the whole program of the right is to continue to deregulate
this ponzi scheme to transfer MORE money to the least productive
members of our society.

You mean the left, leftie fleabag Obama is signing the checks...willingly.

guess the right wing lying sack of **** doesnt know the GOP authored
the deregulation of wall street

and that they fight reregulation even today. that's why he has to
issue a bald faced lie about the black president

You keep changing your story.. you really don't have a leg to stand on
do you?
\
HHAHAHAHAA change my story?

your short term memory seems to have the retention of a sieve

no doubt the pain of the truth about right wing failures is too hard
to bear

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:56:34 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:
The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK


Reply:
Actually Ron Paul was the only one to call several economic disasters
correctly of all the Pols.

meaningless. and he IS a kluxer


He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also. He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC.

the contract ON america you mean. the continued war of the right
against the ameircan middle class