Carter Nails It - - All Bush's Fault

[crocat]

Re: Carter Nails It - - All Bush's Fault
I have been scanning this thread for a bit and even did a well thought out post that some how got eaten.   That always frustrates me so I just closed my browser and went on to the rest of my day.

Common sense said all of these things could happen and if we had used bottom up thinking instead of top down we may have avoided much of it.

First the blame lies at our feet -
1. We spent more than we earned
2. We committed future income based on the presumption that life would continue at status quo (and in case you have not figured it out yet         it never does.
3. Many looked for a hand out when in too deep.

Expect the unexpected because if you do, when the unexpected happens it will be less devastating.  After 911 my husband saw his chosen field dry up and blow away.    Thousands of planes were parked in the dessert.   Boeing and Lockheed, et al, started to turn their focus from improved aerospace to improved weaponry.  We became very concerned; his job became tenuous and soon after our 401K was devastated by the stock market to the tune of 60% losses.  Shortly thereafter his company closed the five divisions he ran and he became unemployed and basically without hopes of finding a job (even with a 50% pay cut) in his field.   We had developed an escape plan.  We re-financed our house paid off all other debt and dumped our expensive lease cars for less expensive lease cars. When his job went away we initiated our escape plan but even then the unexpected happened and my mom was diagnosed with terminal cancer.  I could not leave her and so we were forced to stay in Michigan for another year.  I went to work as a temp and he set about getting his builders license.  Our leases were now due and he purchased a work van and I purchase a Saturn Vue, we packed up our belongings and moved to Florida Labor Day of 2003.   He went to work for a handyman company and I found an administrative assistant position and we were off and running.   By April 2004 we had sold our condo and purchased a home.  Now here is my point.

Because our circumstance we did not fall under the guidelines for a conforming mortgage.... our only option was to go with the non-conforming.

We had the opportunity to purchase a home with little down with a teaser rate of 1.75 % that would adjust monthly.  This loan would increase no more than 2% per year with a ceiling of 9%.  This meant that at some point we would be in a neg am position.

Let's do the math on this....  at the time the (non-teaser) rate was 3.75% for the above mortgage yielding a payment of under $600.00 per month.  A thirty-year fixed would yield a payment of about $1100.00.    I could afford $1100.00 per month.

Two things I know.... rates always go up and the economy periodically tanks.

I could easily given way to temptation and purchased a house for twice the mortgage amount and qualified been given the loan and now be in a position that I was looking down the gun of foreclosure.  Even if you give yourself the argument that you can afford an additional 2 percent rate rise over the year, what they didn't tell you is that A. your loan can only increase X $ and that once your rate gets to the 9% ceiling you will be forced to refinance.  Again.... foreclosure.

It is not their job to make you an informed consumer.... it is your job.  That said, when we have a population that demands the government to baby-sit them.... how can we expect the population to see the value of being informed.   This is just a typical process spin off from the Democrats telling us that they will look after us.

The third thing that I know…. Small businesses make for a healthy economy.   Why?

Because when we have neighborhoods that have ma & pa restaurants, the local bank, the miscellaneous retail stores that are necessities for our everyday – our neighborhood will prosper.  Where does it go wrong?  First we as consumers will drive by most ma & pa restaurants and park our buts at a ‘Friday’s,’ Applebee’s, or any other chain that we see on the telly…. we start to bank at banks that are all over the state on the off chance we need an ATM machine, and finally we will shop chains were some mo mo will look blankly into our face when we ask a question about something we are about to purchase.
Take that one step further and realize that we don’t even support our countries businesses.  The big 3 built automobiles and the rest of the country decided that they were not good enough and started buying Japanese products.  The battle cry was re-educate and get service-oriented occupations.  That was a chuckle because once the factory worker is unemployed, he stops supporting his local restaurants, retail shops.  His wife starts cleaning her own house, doing her own hair and nails and even their own taxes.  Everyone pulls in.  Pretty soon we are in a downward spiral. 

Don’t get me wrong… I am not ignoring the fact that we are having massive financial failures (and of course I know that ultimately the government will get the blame) but had we supported the small local bank they may not have been in a position to have to sell themselves to Wachovia, Fifth Third, Bank of America, Citi Group or the like.   If the natural growth or failure of small businesses were allowed to happen without being gobbled up by big conglomerates the impact would be less substantial and easier for the country to recover

[richpo64]

>>That's assuming that it can be done. There are many areas were a tax will just eliminate the service / product.<<

What it really comes down to is the liberal mentality of penalizing people who work hard and achieve success. I'm sure none of these "eat the rich" people have a clue as to what kind of income people make in order to fall under Barry's axe. Gross income, prededuction ... they haven't the faintest idea. All they know is they wish they made that kind of money.

[Xavier_Onassis]

There are many areas were a tax will just eliminate the service / product.<<


If this is true, none of you have been able to provide even ONE example of this sort of business.

SOMEONE has to pay taxes. If we had some sort of "flat tax" that everyone pays, this ignores the fact that some people require the government more than others. Someone who has no investments does not require the Dept of Commerce to supervise the stock market or to promote US products abroad. Some drive many miles and require Interstate highways, and require them to deliver their products, while others travel only a short distance, and have no products to sell. A bank requires far more police protection than the average person.

It is absolutely silly to think that someone who finds that their personal small business and pays himself $250-K per year will close down that business, retire, and fire all their employees. What he will do if he wishes to expand his business is to pay himself $249K or less and invest the remainder in his business. This could result in MORE jobs, not fewer.

Wealthier people should pay more in taxes because they have more to pay, and going without it is unlikely to  damage their lifestyle. Anyone can easily live very comfortably on $249K per year.

Taxes are not a penalty or a punishment. They are necessary to an effective government.

====================
I'm sure none of these "eat the rich" people have a clue as to what kind of income people make in order to fall under Barry's axe

OF COURSE they do, because he has made it quite clear: no one pays more in taxes under his plan unless he makes more than $250,000.

Everyone else pays less. That would surely include everyone in this forum. I find it bizarre that people bitch so much about a tax rate that they will never pay.

I really doubt that the will be tax cuts very soon, as any new president must get all the details about the economy. I would imagine that Obama new tax code would not go into effect until 2010.

[Michael Tee]

What it really comes down to is the liberal mentality of penalizing people who work hard and achieve success. I'm sure none of these "eat the rich" people have a clue as to what kind of income people make in order to fall under Barry's axe. Gross income, prededuction ... they haven't the faintest idea. All they know is they wish they made that kind of money.

====================================================================

No what it really comes down to is some greedy bastard making more money than he has any right to make and unwilling to share his good fortune with his neighbours whose kids through no fault of their own don't have enough to eat.  This bastard if he makes over $250K per year can well afford any tax increase that Obama is likely to inflict upon him and if he cries about it nobody will give a shit.  He'll still be doing better than 95% of the population even after paying his tax increase.  So fuck the greedy bastard and let's look after those who CAN'T help themselves.  Everybody's got a basic right to decent housing, decent health care and decent education.  If Mr. $250K doesn't like it, he better find himself a new country to live in.  Obama is gonna spread some economic equity around, like it or not.  The people are ready.

[BT]

Everyone else pays less. That would surely include everyone in this forum. I find it bizarre that people bitch so much about a tax rate that they will never pay.

Probably for the same reason that white people took part in the civil rights movement. They see people being treated as "others" and they don't think that is fair.

[sirs]

Precisely....which was my point being made to Kimba

[crocat]

What it really comes down to is the liberal mentality of penalizing people who work hard and achieve success. I'm sure none of these "eat the rich" people have a clue as to what kind of income people make in order to fall under Barry's axe. Gross income, prededuction ... they haven't the faintest idea. All they know is they wish they made that kind of money.

====================================================================

No what it really comes down to is some greedy bastard making more money than he has any right to make and unwilling to share his good fortune with his neighbours whose kids through no fault of their own don't have enough to eat.  This bastard if he makes over $250K per year can well afford any tax increase that Obama is likely to inflict upon him and if he cries about it nobody will give a shit.  He'll still be doing better than 95% of the population even after paying his tax increase.  So fuck the greedy bastard and let's look after those who CAN'T help themselves.  Everybody's got a basic right to decent housing, decent health care and decent education.  If Mr. $250K doesn't like it, he better find himself a new country to live in.  Obama is gonna spread some economic equity around, like it or not.  The people are ready.

Michael,

I have a question because when I read your posts about people making (what you consider) a lot of money, you seem almost in a rage.

You don't seem to consider that the person may have gone to school( borrowing many thousands of dollars to pay for it).  They may donate money or time to some worthy cause.  They may in fact not be greedy bastards at all.

You also don't even flinch about those in need and how they came to be such.  They could be crack heads... alcoholics that put every dime they make into making themselves numb.  They may in fact choose not to take care of themselves.

But before you get on your high horse.... one can be as true as the other.

To go to medical school a student is faced with $200,000.00 in debt.   If they can get in Harvard, that amount is understated as it cost $68,000 per year there.  The rates paid a primary care physician are between 111,000.00 and 211,000.00.

Eight years additional schooling

Law school, approx $50,000 per year.

seven years additional schooling

GED.... about $100.00 + the opportunity to get right to work on career choice.

I really don't think everything is as black and white as you seem to believe.

[Xavier_Onassis]

This is not about beginning doctors and lawyers, most of whom do not come close to $250,000 per year after deductions. The truth is that the middle class of this country has made HUGE increases in productivity, and yet the amount they are paid has barely budged for most and for some it has gone down. The productivity has gone to pay the CEO's and the rest of management.

Before we worry about people who are in no way hurting, we need to make sure we are fairly treated, and the fact is, we aren't.

[Universe Prince]

EXACTLY.  If the guy can't make enough to pay himself and his employees a fair living wage, and can't convince a bank or private lender or family to back him till he picks up speed, then this is the guy who SHOULD fall by the wayside.

Ever hear of a fella called Darwin?

As I recover from the shock of Michael Tee saying something with which I completely agree, I feel I should ask, did he advocate social darwinism? It looks like he did. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Social Darwinism of businesses makes sense. I don't think individuals should be left to starve if they can't hack it, though.

Its' not like AIG execs are going to curl up and die of starvation.

Mostly, they just will visit that spa less often. In extreme cases, some will be subjected to the humiliation of wearing Florsheims instead of Bruno Magli's or Gucci's shoes.

[Universe Prince]

Aaah. The magic of the marketplace. Somehow it's always the government's fault if the business fails.

No, not always. But denying the costs added by government would be foolish.

Taxes are just another cost of doing business, like rent. The business needs the police protection, the streets and roads, the services of government lots more than the average citizen.

That is not a reason to see how much cost government can add to doing business. I always find amazing how much people who claim to speak for the common man want to make sure he faces the most insane uphill battle to own and operate his own business while large, humongous corporations that get corporate welfare continue to prosper.

Capitalism is inherently unfair. Taxing those who manage to harness this unfairness should pay for the added benefits they enjoy.

Complete and utter nonsense. There is nothing unfair about capitalism. You might as well say hammers are unfair or that combine harvesters are unfair or that food banks are unfair or that churches are unfair. Capitalism is a tool. People are sometimes unfair. And sometimes the results of capitalistic endeavors are not what someone might like, but that hardly makes capitalism unfair. And raising taxes to increase the costs, thereby making success that much more difficult, hardly makes capitalism somehow less unfair.

[Michael Tee]

<<You don't seem to consider that the person may have gone to school( borrowing many thousands of dollars to pay for it).  They may donate money or time to some worthy cause.  They may in fact not be greedy bastards at all.>>

Those schools, and particularly the medical schools, get by on endowments and government grants.  Tuition is a drop in the bucket.  You might be interested to know that in the U.S.S.R., as in Cuba, as in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, education from JK through grad school is paid for by the state, and at least in the U.S.S.R., and perhaps in other socialist countries as well, university students were paid a salary to go to school and learn.

The obvious difference in underlying philosophy is that in a socialist country, it is realized that society as a whole has an interest in producing the best educated population that it can, whereas in the capitalist world, education is something that a smart, selfish & greedy bastard will buy for himself because it gives him a leg up in the race for the biggest bucks and the most material rewards.

I would rather live in a world where doctors' incomes are limited by taxation or government planning to a reasonably comfortable amount, so that the medical schools will attract more of the kind of students who are genuinely interested in healing and less of the selfish greedy bastards who are primarily interested in $$$$$$$$$$$ka-ching!

Before-tax income of $250K looks pretty good to me, and if a heftier tax bite than what's presently exacted will force some out of the profession, then I would say, Good riddance!  The medical profession does not need more doctors like that, it needs more doctors who would be content to live on $250K before-tax income regardless of what the tax ultimately is.  (So long as it's within reason.)  The problem with capitalism is (1) everyone's greedy and (2) everyone gets to set his or her own level of compensation.  A mature, adult society cannot operate on such infantile, self-interested principles.  The end result is widespread misery for the masses, and material satisfaction only for the very few at the top.

<<You also don't even flinch about those in need and how they came to be such.  They could be crack heads... alcoholics that put every dime they make into making themselves numb.  They may in fact choose not to take care of themselves.>>

Crackheads, alcoholics etc. these are people who fell through the numerous cracks of a system that never gave a shit about its most vulnerable people.  Most of the crackheads come from crackhead neigbourhoods and are the children and grandchildren of similar unfortunates.  They never had a chance. You don't see many crackheads from Grosse Pointe, do you?  We can practically predict, given the parentage, the neighbourhood, the school and the family income, who is at a 50% or higher risk of turning into a crackhead and who is at a 1% or less risk.  We have NEVER (and I include Canada in this) never spent the capital necessary to make even the smallest dent in the social problems that plague North America, yet the pittance we HAVE spent is constantly derided by the crypto-fascist right as "throwing money at the problem."  A truly laughable and ridiculous mischaracterization.

In order to truly give disadvantaged children an equal opportunity in life, there is no alternative to spending massively on their social entitlements, and there is no other place to get the funds necessary for than than to TAX THE RICH.  How much more obvious can that be?  A guy earning a B4 tax income of $250 should not be in a position to ask for one penny more.  Fuck him if he can't pay the present tax on that income and fuck him twice if he can't pay Obama's tax on it.  I am sick and tired of these guys who can stand by and watch children turn into crackheads for lack of funding of aggressive social engineering and yet bitch if he can't afford  his luxury automobile, his private plane or his speedboat.  This kind of whining in the old Soviet Union would have earned the guy a place up against the wall, but all that is going to happen to him here is that his exorbitant life-style will have to be trimmed down a bit till it matches more with everyone else's - - teachers, nurses, cops, firemen - -  people who really perform some kind of TRULY VALUABLE SERVICE to the community, unlike Mr. $250K.

[Universe Prince]

No what it really comes down to is some greedy bastard making more money than he has any right to make and unwilling to share his good fortune with his neighbours whose kids through no fault of their own don't have enough to eat.

Who the f--- are you to decide how much money someone else should make? I notice you haven't sold your computer to feed your neighbor's kids. What bugs me about this is the attitude that it's always someone else's responsibility to do something to help people. That rich guy, it's his responsibility. It's government's responsibility. Always someone else is demanded to do what we are supposed to do. And always this selfishness is couched in accusations of someone else's greed. They have more and it's not fair. It's like listening to five-year-olds.

[Michael Tee]

<<Who the f--- are you to decide how much money someone else should make? >>

Um, I DON'T decide that.  It's a decision I'd leave to my elected socialist representatives, or that I hope will be made by President Obama and his Cabinet.  The decision is above my pay grade, but I feel that $250K is more than reasonable.  That's my opinion.  What you are really asking me is, "Who the fuck are you to have an opinion on anything?"  To which I reply, I have the same right to an opinion as you or anyone else.

<<I notice you haven't sold your computer to feed your neighbor's kids. >>

Why, how perceptive you are.  I hope the next thing you notice is that I advocated a collective responsibility, not my personal responsibility, as a means of ensuring some fairness in the contributions made by all the members of our society.

<<What bugs me about this is the attitude that it's always someone else's responsibility to do something to help people. >>

I guess I should have made it plainer that I also am a citizen and not some alien phoning in my opinion from another planet.  Thus, as a member of the society that I live in, it will NOT be "someone else's responsibility" to do something to help people, it will be MY responsibility and that of my fellow citizens.

<<That rich guy, it's his responsibility. >>

[sigh]  OK class, one more time:  MY responsibility and that of my fellow citizens.  ALL of us together according to what each of us can bear.

<<It's government's responsibility. >>

Yes.

<<Always someone else is demanded to do what we are supposed to do. >>

Government is the representative of the people.  It IS "we the people" in action, through duly elected representatives.

<<And always this selfishness is couched in accusations of someone else's greed. >>

Yes.  GREED.  How else would you describe it when some rich ass-hole says, "Yes it's a shame to watch kids turn into crackheads but I don't want to pay to help them because then I'll have fewer toys to play with.  $250K isn't enough for me to live on."  Well, come on now, I know there's another word than greed, tell me what YOU would call that.

<<They have more and it's not fair. >>

Not fair that this guy has $250K annual before tax income and some kid is turning into a crackhead because this asshole won't sacrifice any of that income to help out?  Fucking A it is not fair for him to have what he has while kids' lives are being ruined in front of  his eyes in slow motion.  No, it is not fair.

<<It's like listening to five-year-olds.>>

There is nothing at all mature about greed and selfishness.  Don't kid yourself.  The five-year old is the selfish greedy bastard who clings to his toys rather than sacrifice some of that money to fund a crash course to prevent the further spread of human misery.  YOU'RE not listening to five-year-olds, I'M listening to five-year-olds.

[richpo64]

>>Um, I DON'T decide that.  It's a decision I'd leave to my elected socialist representatives, or that I hope will be made by President Obama and his Cabinet.<<

Here's the thing. In America, if the government begins to decide what you're paid for a job, or what kind of job you will do, it's revolution time Mike. We're armed, and we won't allow that to happen. I'm confident the military would never allow president Obama to turn this country into the Soviet People's Republic of America. So without insulting you personally, I have to tell you that you are the tiniest of minorities on the continent. Even Canadians wouldn't allow the government to take complete control. History has proven, and current events also prove that Communism is a failure and only lasts because murdering despots force it upon people through the threat of torture and death. It's against human nature. I'm all for any American earning 250K, or $million. I'm not sure I can get to $million, but I hope my children can. If they do, I know they'll give to the poor because they've been taught the meaning of charity. something Joe Biden and Algore apparently have not learned.