Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[Andylusion]

That's because ignorance is bliss.

Our "currency" - is printed and manipulated by the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK - a PRIVATE ENTITY WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED.

No go forth and sin no more.

.

Oh bull. Give me a break. The Federal Reserve is as much a "private entity" as the US Postal Service.

The Federal Reserve is controlled by congress. .

It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks:

"The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 04/19/1982)

.

Yelling and screaming, doesn't make what you say true.

Now granted, the government does not regulate day to day business at the Federal Reserve. ..... so..... what?

True or False: Alan Greenspan was appointed by Reagan?
True or False: Ben Bernanke was appointed by Bush?
True or False: Ben Bernanke was an economic adviser to Bush before being appointed for the Fed?
True or False: Janet Yellen was appointed by Obama, and Approved by Congress?
True or False: Janet Yellen served as an economic adviser to Clinton in 97-99?
True or False: Janet Yellen served on the Federal Reserve Board before 97?
True or False: Timothy Geithner who served as Secretary of the Treasury, was president of the Fed in New York?

Are you seeing a pattern here? These people weave in and out of government office, into the Fed, and back in to government office, over and over and over again. The same guy running the Treasury, was running the Fed. The same guy running the Fed, was on the economic advisers to the President.

These same people, moving from executive, to agency, to Fed, to executive, to agency, to the Fed.

For you to claim that the Federal Government has no bearing on what the Fed Does, when all these guys are shuffling around from government position, to Fed, to Treasury to whatever else.... is absolutely retarded.

I'm just saying.... this is not a supportable position for you. These guys at the Fed, know their next job comes from someone in Congress appointing them to another government position. When congress sends over a note saying "You need to do X",.... THEY DO IT. They are as much a body of the government as the US Postal Service.

I'm sorry. To claim otherwise is ridiculous. I don't give a crap what the words on the paper say. You can cite "well blaw blaw blaw, says they are private, and independent!". Bull. I know better. With all due respect... get a clue man. Can't you see whats going on? It's not independent at all.

 

[Contumacious]

But the fact of the matter IS that income inequality at a certain level is a bad thing for society and should be avoided if possible.

Low income --should be bad - for the recipient. But some folks are UNmotivated.

But "society" , by which you mean taxpayers and producers should not be adversely affected. They should be allowed to exercise their right to stand their ground and defend their wealth using deadly force if necessary.

.

Hey - I'm not arguing about the morality of it all, I'm just saying that it happens. When you have a finite amount of resources, and 90% are owned by 1 guy in a society of 100, eventually those 99 individuals are going to say "fuck it" and forcibly make the 1 guy share with the rest. This is what happens.

Even the strongest, cleverest, most powerful lion can't defend itself from 99 jealous peers. It's simply a fact of life.

Of course they can. The only impediment is the federal "judiciary" and they nazistic rulings upholding "laws" regulating "assault weapons" and the size of Rifle Magazines.

.

 

[Contumacious]

Oh bull. Give me a break. The Federal Reserve is as much a "private entity" as the US Postal Service.

The Federal Reserve is controlled by congress. .

It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks:

"The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 04/19/1982)

.

Yelling and screaming, doesn't make what you say true.

l.

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. § 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. § 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 341-361.

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 04/19/1982)


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's because ignorance is bliss.

Our "currency" - is printed and manipulated by the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK - a PRIVATE ENTITY WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED.

No go forth and sin no more.

.

the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK - a PRIVATE ENTITY

The Fed is "owned" by the government.

WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED

Except for all the times it was.

FRB: Annual Report 2012 - Federal Reserve System Audits

Shut the fuck up

Petition to Audit the Fed

This week, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), took up his father Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed cause when he introduced S. 209, a bill identical to H.R. 459.

Last year, Congressman Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed bill (H.R. 459), passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 327-98—a veto-proof majority. That bill called for a “full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States.” The bill garnered overwhelming bipartisan support even though the House Democrat Leadership opposed the bill vociferously.

Ron Paul’s bill never received a vote in the Senate during the last Congress because Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who publicly supported the bill before it passed the House, refused under pressure from the White House to allow the Senate to take up the House-passed Paul bill despite overwhelming Senate support for the bill."

.

Yeah, Ron was never the brightest bulb in Congress. LOL!

Rand has to walk a fine line.
He'd like to attract conservative voters and keep his dad's nutjob supporters.
It won't be easy.

 

[Contumacious]

the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK - a PRIVATE ENTITY

The Fed is "owned" by the government.

WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED

Except for all the times it was.

FRB: Annual Report 2012 - Federal Reserve System Audits

Shut the fuck up

Petition to Audit the Fed

This week, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), took up his father Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed cause when he introduced S. 209, a bill identical to H.R. 459.

Last year, Congressman Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed bill (H.R. 459), passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 327-98—a veto-proof majority. That bill called for a “full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States.” The bill garnered overwhelming bipartisan support even though the House Democrat Leadership opposed the bill vociferously.

Ron Paul’s bill never received a vote in the Senate during the last Congress because Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who publicly supported the bill before it passed the House, refused under pressure from the White House to allow the Senate to take up the House-passed Paul bill despite overwhelming Senate support for the bill."

.

Yeah, Ron was never the brightest bulb in Congress. LOL!

Rand has to walk a fine line.
He'd like to attract conservative voters and keep his dad's nutjob supporters.
It won't be easy.

Talking about not being the brightest bulb, did you notice , by any chance , that the bill seeks to AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Shut the fuck up

Petition to Audit the Fed

This week, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), took up his father Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed cause when he introduced S. 209, a bill identical to H.R. 459.

Last year, Congressman Ron Paul's Audit-the-Fed bill (H.R. 459), passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 327-98—a veto-proof majority. That bill called for a “full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States.” The bill garnered overwhelming bipartisan support even though the House Democrat Leadership opposed the bill vociferously.

Ron Paul’s bill never received a vote in the Senate during the last Congress because Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who publicly supported the bill before it passed the House, refused under pressure from the White House to allow the Senate to take up the House-passed Paul bill despite overwhelming Senate support for the bill."

.

Yeah, Ron was never the brightest bulb in Congress. LOL!

Rand has to walk a fine line.
He'd like to attract conservative voters and keep his dad's nutjob supporters.
It won't be easy.

Talking about not being the brightest bulb, did you notice , by any chance , that the bill seeks to AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Yeah, Ron wanted to audit the Fed, but the Fed is audited all the time.

Like I said, he wasn't too bright

 

[Contumacious]

Yeah, Ron was never the brightest bulb in Congress. LOL!

Rand has to walk a fine line.
He'd like to attract conservative voters and keep his dad's nutjob supporters.
It won't be easy.

Talking about not being the brightest bulb, did you notice , by any chance , that the bill seeks to AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Yeah, Ron wanted to audit the Fed, but the Fed is audited all the time.

Like I said, he wasn't too bright

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED AS THAT TERM IS USED BY ACCOUNTANTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Auditing the Fed Will Audit the State

If Ron Paul succeeds in getting the Fed audited, the consequences could be far-reaching. Assuming the audit isn't rigged to protect the guilty, as a similar bill was in 1978, the Fed will need every obfuscating Keynesian to testify and write editorials on its behalf, to reassure the public that monetary matters really are best left to the gods who rule us, such as Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner. Monetarists, too, would likely join the "Save the Fed" crusade, perhaps arguing that even a great free market economist like Milton Friedman considered the Fed useful for preventing and curing recessions.

.

 

[Misty]

I'm going to put this as simply as I can, since that seems to be what's required.

Capitalism is good. High taxes are bad.

Why capital gains tax rates are lower than income tax rates | New Hampshire Columns

"How are capital gains different from ordinary income?

Ordinary income is usually guaranteed. If you work a certain amount of time, you are legally entitled to the pay that you were offered when you took the job. Capital gains involve risk. They are not guaranteed. You can invest your money and lose it all. Moreover, the year when you receive capital gains may not be the same as the years when they were earned."

Very similar principles apply to businesses. We pay attention to businesses after they have succeeded. But most new businesses do not succeed. Even those businesses that eventually turn out to be enormously successful may go through years of losing money before they have their first year of earning a profit.

Amazon.com spent years losing money before turning a profit for the first time in 2001. McDonald's teetered on the edge of bankruptcy more than once in its early years. Desperate expedients were resorted to by the people who ran McDonald's, in order to just keep their noses above the water, while hoping for better days."

From a great article;

The first part of the article focuses on the poor investor and tries to paint a picture that makes it look like the issue is about taxing struggling companies. It isn't. It is about how there is a small number of people making a lot of money in personal income and paying significantly less than others.

There is risk in labor as well. People have to invest their lives into careers that may simply not be there in five years. When a company goes under people lose jobs too.

There is no doubt that taxation impacts markets and they impact the labor market just like they impact the capital market. The problem with the article is that it is made without any reference to the actual health of those markets. The labor market has struggled for decades while the capital market has exploded.

 

[Trajan]

$16.5M minus $495k.

You realized $16.5 million in a taxable account and only paid 3%?

Yes.

ok, so I will assume you asked your accountant to also calculate your tax burden at say 22% , then sat down and wrote a check to the US treasury for the difference, just like warren buffett....right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Talking about not being the brightest bulb, did you notice , by any chance , that the bill seeks to AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Yeah, Ron wanted to audit the Fed, but the Fed is audited all the time.

Like I said, he wasn't too bright

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED AS THAT TERM IS USED BY ACCOUNTANTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Auditing the Fed Will Audit the State

If Ron Paul succeeds in getting the Fed audited, the consequences could be far-reaching. Assuming the audit isn't rigged to protect the guilty, as a similar bill was in 1978, the Fed will need every obfuscating Keynesian to testify and write editorials on its behalf, to reassure the public that monetary matters really are best left to the gods who rule us, such as Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner. Monetarists, too, would likely join the "Save the Fed" crusade, perhaps arguing that even a great free market economist like Milton Friedman considered the Fed useful for preventing and curing recessions.

.

The financial statements of the Board of Governors for 2011 and 2010 were audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, independent auditors.




March 8, 2012

MANAGEMENT'S ASSERTION

To the Committee on Board Affairs:

The management of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ("the Board") is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the balance sheet as of December 31, 2011, and for the related statement of revenues and expenses and changes in cumulative results of operations, and cash flows for the year then ended (the "Financial Statements"). The Financial Statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and, as such, include some amounts which are based on management judgments and estimates. To our knowledge, the Financial Statements are, in all material respects, fairly presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and include all disclosures necessary for such presentation.

Board management is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting as it relates to the Financial Statements. Such internal control is designed to provide reasonable assurance to management and to the Committee on Board Affairs regarding the preparation of the Financial Statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The Board's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Board; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of Financial Statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that the Board's receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of its management; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Board's assets that could have a material effect on the Financial Statements.

Even effective internal control--no matter how well designed--has inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error. Internal control, therefore, can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation of reliable Financial Statements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that specific controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Board management assessed its internal control over financial reporting reflected in the Financial Statements based upon the criteria established in the Internal Control--Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

Based on this assessment, we believe that the Board has maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as it relates to its Financial Statements.



Richard A. Anderson
Chief Operating Officer



William L. Mitchell
Chief Financial Officer


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System:

Washington, D.C.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "Board") as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related statements of revenues and expenses and changes in cumulative results of operations, and cash flows for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Board's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards as established by the Auditing Standards Board (United States), auditing standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the Board's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, based on the criteria established in Internal Control--Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 8, 2012 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Board's internal control over financial reporting.

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated March 8, 2012, on our tests of the Board's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit.



March 8, 2012
McLean, VA

FRB: Annual Report 2011 - Federal Reserve System Audits

Their auditors beg to differ.

 

[Indeependent]

I'm going to put this as simply as I can, since that seems to be what's required.

Capitalism is good. High taxes are bad.

Why capital gains tax rates are lower than income tax rates | New Hampshire Columns

"How are capital gains different from ordinary income?

Ordinary income is usually guaranteed. If you work a certain amount of time, you are legally entitled to the pay that you were offered when you took the job. Capital gains involve risk. They are not guaranteed. You can invest your money and lose it all. Moreover, the year when you receive capital gains may not be the same as the years when they were earned."

Very similar principles apply to businesses. We pay attention to businesses after they have succeeded. But most new businesses do not succeed. Even those businesses that eventually turn out to be enormously successful may go through years of losing money before they have their first year of earning a profit.

Amazon.com spent years losing money before turning a profit for the first time in 2001. McDonald's teetered on the edge of bankruptcy more than once in its early years. Desperate expedients were resorted to by the people who ran McDonald's, in order to just keep their noses above the water, while hoping for better days."

From a great article;

The first part of the article focuses on the poor investor and tries to paint a picture that makes it look like the issue is about taxing struggling companies. It isn't. It is about how there is a small number of people making a lot of money in personal income and paying significantly less than others.

There is risk in labor as well. People have to invest their lives into careers that may simply not be there in five years. When a company goes under people lose jobs too.

There is no doubt that taxation impacts markets and they impact the labor market just like they impact the capital market. The problem with the article is that it is made without any reference to the actual health of those markets. The labor market has struggled for decades while the capital market has exploded.

And coupled with off-shoring, business visas and 30 million illegals is GREAT!

 

[Trajan]

Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.

"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

who cares? .....see george, thats the beauty of it.

here you have the right to go get your own....so, go get your own.

 

[Andylusion]

Hey - I'm not arguing about the morality of it all, I'm just saying that it happens. When you have a finite amount of resources, and 90% are owned by 1 guy in a society of 100, eventually those 99 individuals are going to say "fuck it" and forcibly make the 1 guy share with the rest. This is what happens.

Even the strongest, cleverest, most powerful lion can't defend itself from 99 jealous peers. It's simply a fact of life.

Not true.

Resources are not 'finite', they are dynamic.

I was listening to a documentary on the BBC about a water utilities in an African country. And the system was socialized, where the amount money given for water was provided by the government, and there was massive water shortages throughout the country.

Well they privatized it, and a guy started operating the water utilities like a business, and demanding payment for water. In the process by getting people to provide money for the water, he was able to invest that money into building more systems for getting water. The percentage of the population with access to clean drinking water, more than doubled if I remember.

All resources operate this way.

As the value of resources increases, the value in developing those resources also increases.

Take for example Shale Oil. Back in the 90s, and even the early 2000s, experts in Oil, said Shale Oil would "never be developed" because it was simply uneconomical to do so. I can remember guys on forums just like this saying "Shale Oil will never be used".... then 2008 hit. The price of oil went up to $140 a barrel. Suddenly, it was economical to invest in Shale Oil. In the process of investing in Shale Oil, the cost to produce Shale Oil declined down to an average $50 a barrel. No one predicted this.

Resources are dynamic. When the price is low, it seems like we have dwindling supplies, because there's no economical way to get many resources. But when the price is high, it spurs investment, and that investment will lead to more resources being economical.

Water surplus in Israel? With desalination, once unthinkable is possible | Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Water in the desert regions of Israel, is of course rare, and costly. But that cost, also drove investment. Today Israel is producing more clean drinking water from Ocean salt water, than the entire country can consume. They are now selling excess water to Jordan, and a few others.

Now all of that to say this.

"Wealth" is also a dynamic resource. If you deny the benefit to those who grow wealth, wealth will not be grown. This is why every system where the 99 greedy people, demand that the 1 guy share, end up impoverished.

Look at it another way. Say I'm the wealthy guy, and I have BMW Z4. MSRP $65K. Say I have a fleet of them. And the 99 greedy people, come and take my cars away.

In about 10 years time, both me, and the 99 greedy people, will end up right back where we are now. Why?

If you don't have the ability to buy a BMW Z4 now, how will you be able to maintain one if it was stolen from me, and given to you? The first time something breaks, and you take it into the shop, and they say "yeah, that'll be $2,000 to fix the blaw blaw", you won't have it.

Me on the other hand, if I have the ability to earn enough to buy the BMW Z4 before, then likely I will have it again, and will be able to get another one.

As such, the wealth divided up will be consumed and gone. The wealth earned, will be replaced. Wealth itself is dynamic.

This is the universal truth.

Similarly, if you try and prevent me from earning more, I'll simply move to where I can earn more. When France passed it's wealth tax, thousands of the wealthy in France, moved operations out of the country.

When Venezuela started confiscating the rightfully earned property of the wealthy, they packed up and left. Over one million people, in a country of only 29 million, have left Venezuela, and most all of them were the wealthy job makers, wealth creators of the country.

And Venezuela is less wealthy, and in fact the worst performing economy in Latin America.

When the people who produce wealth leave, that doesn't mean wealth is spread more evenly among the people. It means there is less wealth period, and people end up more impoverished.

 

[Andylusion]

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. § 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. § 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 341-361.

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 04/19/1982)


.

Last chance. I don't deal with stupid people. I don't deal with childish people.

You failed to make a point the first time. You failed the second time, while repeating yourself like a really dumb child, as if saying it again, makes it all true.

So this is your one and only warning. Next time you act like a 5-year-old whose parents forgot to put him to bed, you join my ignore list. There, you will cease to exist in my world, for all time. You won't be missed, and given the fact you have failed to say anything of value thus far, I will not be missing anything.

Last chance. Want to discuss stuff? Fine. Answer the questions I posed in the prior post, or make a counter point. That's what adults do. If that's not you, just make another childish, Forest Gump style post, and I will eliminate you from my world forever! Up to you! Grow up, or get out. Make your choice. I'm fine either way.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Let me make it simple. $16.5M income, $495k taxes.

Let me make it even simpler, you are lying.

Can't stand the fact that the people you've been supporting for years make it easier for the rich to get richer?

Sorry, you are the one that claims he hates the rich. Personally, I like the idea that people get rich.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then why does the top 20% get 50% of the overall tax breaks?

Because, just like your claim about your income and how much you paid, you are lying. Everyone gets the tax breaks, the top 20% more likely to itemize rather than take the standard deduction.

For 50% of the tax breaks, which moots your claim of 'heavily skewed in favor of people with low incomes'.

No it doesn't.

 

[Contumacious]

Their auditors beg to differ.

319 Representatives say it ain't so

‘Audit the Fed’ is back

This week, Representative Paul Broun of Georgia introduced an “Audit the Fed” bill that is identical to Ron Paul’s bill, H.R. 459, which passed the House last year 327-98. The original bill, which carried 319 cosponsors and enjoyed widespread public support according to polls, was killed in the Senate. There’s little reason to believe that it will avoid a similar fate this session."

.

 

[Contumacious]

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. § 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. § 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 341-361.

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 04/19/1982)


.

Last chance. I don't deal with stupid people. I don't deal with childish people.

You failed to make a point the first time. You failed the second time, while repeating yourself like a really dumb child, as if saying it again, makes it all true.

So this is your one and only warning. Next time you act like a 5-year-old whose parents forgot to put him to bed, you join my ignore list. There, you will cease to exist in my world, for all time. You won't be missed, and given the fact you have failed to say anything of value thus far, I will not be missing anything.

Last chance. Want to discuss stuff? Fine. Answer the questions I posed in the prior post, or make a counter point. That's what adults do. If that's not you, just make another childish, Forest Gump style post, and I will eliminate you from my world forever! Up to you! Grow up, or get out. Make your choice. I'm fine either way.

Now go fuck yourself and continue ignoring the facts. Be selectively blind.

.

 

[Bombur]

I'm going to put this as simply as I can, since that seems to be what's required.

Capitalism is good. High taxes are bad.

Why capital gains tax rates are lower than income tax rates | New Hampshire Columns

"How are capital gains different from ordinary income?

Ordinary income is usually guaranteed. If you work a certain amount of time, you are legally entitled to the pay that you were offered when you took the job. Capital gains involve risk. They are not guaranteed. You can invest your money and lose it all. Moreover, the year when you receive capital gains may not be the same as the years when they were earned."

Very similar principles apply to businesses. We pay attention to businesses after they have succeeded. But most new businesses do not succeed. Even those businesses that eventually turn out to be enormously successful may go through years of losing money before they have their first year of earning a profit.

Amazon.com spent years losing money before turning a profit for the first time in 2001. McDonald's teetered on the edge of bankruptcy more than once in its early years. Desperate expedients were resorted to by the people who ran McDonald's, in order to just keep their noses above the water, while hoping for better days."

From a great article;

The first part of the article focuses on the poor investor and tries to paint a picture that makes it look like the issue is about taxing struggling companies. It isn't. It is about how there is a small number of people making a lot of money in personal income and paying significantly less than others.

There is risk in labor as well. People have to invest their lives into careers that may simply not be there in five years. When a company goes under people lose jobs too.

There is no doubt that taxation impacts markets and they impact the labor market just like they impact the capital market. The problem with the article is that it is made without any reference to the actual health of those markets. The labor market has struggled for decades while the capital market has exploded.

Yet we have taxes so we talk about how they can be better.

 

[American4Americ]

Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.

"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

Inequality is not a problem. I would rather see 3,000,000,000 starve, before to sanctioning theft. Freedom and liberty are the two single most important things on earth.